3 ms·
Been a Ruby programmer for 5 years now and I find that this is dodging the issue. Sure the productivity is higher but what happens when you're finished developi
by VeejayRampay 13y ago
Been a Ruby programmer for 5 years now and I find that this is dodging the issue. Sure the productivity is higher but what happens when you're finished developing and your code is now running in production? What happens when it's slow at serving requests, slow at any form of computations, slow when a rake task is starting?
Talking about productivity is a good thing because raw "power" doesn't mean anything, but I really wish we could admit publicly that Ruby is really not a race horse. It does other things awfully well and I wouldn't trade language for the world, but man, I wish it could get a free speed jump like Javascript got a few years ago.
- tomphoolery 13y agoThere have been some steps in that direction, it seems. At my company, we made a graphics rendering engine in Ruby (haven't released it yet). In testing, it ran steadily, but consumed a lot of resources. But in each new version of Ruby, we saw that resource usage go down. Given that same level of innovation, we will see this graphics engine reach similar speeds as our current, more performant C and Lua implementation eventually. Ruby 2.0 and 2.1 made incredible improvements to the garbage collector, a major source of our problem. We determined that it was the speed at which we were creating and destroying objects that was causing the GC to work on overdrive, which drove up CPU usage. So with the new GC improvements, we saw that usage go further and further down.
- nthj 13y ago> I really wish we could admit publicly that Ruby is really not a race horse. Ruby isn't a race horse. It just turns out that when you're just plowing fields, harnessing up your prize stallion is a waste of resources.