4 ms·
Most users don't care if rbenv is better than rvm since they do the same thing, and apparently, at least according to the other poster, rbenv is slow
by tesmar2 14y ago
Most users don't care if rbenv is better than rvm since they do the same thing, and apparently, at least according to the other poster, rbenv is slow
- lloeki 14y ago> according to the other poster, rbenv is slow Define slow: $ time /home/lloeki/.rbenv/versions/1.9.3-p286/bin/ruby -e 'exit' real 0m0.012s user 0m0.007s sys 0m0.003s $ rbenv global 1.9.3-p286 $ time /home/lloeki/.rbenv/shims/ruby -e 'exit' real 0m0.055s user 0m0.027s sys 0m0.007s Hardly something to cry foul for. Your first significant require will blow that time by an order of magnitude. And hardly surprising either since rbenv the alias calls rbenv the command, which sets a few env vars then calls rbenv-$1 (probably $1==exec), which calls rbenv-hooks $1 (probably a noop by default) then $1 + args. rbenv is seriously thin. > huge startup lag it adds to every invocation of ruby or any other bin installed via a gem Sounds more like bundler (maybe automatically started by ohmyzsh when just typing 'ruby' where you have a Gemfile): $ time bundle exec ruby -e 'exit' real 0m0.570s user 0m0.480s sys 0m0.057s or as mentioned, someone put too much stuff in his bashrc or something.