2 ms·
i feel ruby's syntax is mostly done. an addition here or there, but breaking shall be rare as it just feels so finished. performance wise i think it can use (an
by cies 13y ago
i feel ruby's syntax is mostly done. an addition here or there, but breaking shall be rare as it just feels so finished. performance wise i think it can use (and gets) a lot of love.
on the python side things are different. python seems quite a bit faster then ruby. same league, but faster. yet its syntax is what needs to be greatly improved upon as it is so full of surprises and dark corners.
a language's syntax it's like its API, and performance is an implementation "detail". breaking the API is much more painful then chaning the implementation -- therefor i prefer ruby's approach: begin slow but with a quite stable syntax.
p.s. i dont intend to hurt feelings with this comment
- anonova 13y agoIn synthetic benchmarks, Ruby 2.0 is generally faster or approximately equal to that of Python 3. http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=yarv&lang2=python3&data=u64 http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?te...