2 ms·

Anecdotical datapoint: For a great many years I used to consider python a very slow language. Then I switched to Ruby and realized how slow a language can reall

by moe 12y ago

Anecdotical datapoint: For a great many years I used to consider python a very slow language. Then I switched to Ruby and realized how slow a language can really be and yet still be practical for many use-cases.

stefantalpalaru 12y ago
Try shell scripting.
Freaky 12y ago
Except Ruby isn't really significantly slower than Python?
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  The mainline implementations are not that far apart now, but IIRC it wasn't all that long ago that MRI was significantly slower than CPython.
  - Freaky 12y ago
    I suppose it depends on how you define "that long ago" and "mainline implementations". From my point of view it's coming along to about half a decade, but I guess 1.8's remained popular in many places as recently as 2-3 years ago.
    - moe 12y ago
      The difference does not primarily stem from raw interpreter performance but rather from the different community mindsets and resulting ecosystems. The average code-quality in rubygems is just not very high. Consequently most libraries are completely oblivious to performance aspects. This reaches straight into the core infrastructure (rubygems, bundler) and all major projects (Rails). Leading to the simple fact that Ruby loses out on many practical benchmarks before your script has even loaded. Likewise the synergies of less than bright behaviors from all the gems in your average Rails project (and no least Rails itself) do indeed make the performance gap towards an average django project much larger than the mere difference in sheer interpreter performance. That's all not meant to bash Ruby anyway. It's a trade-off me and many others are willing to make, for the convenience that ruby provides after it has finally set its fat belly into motion. But let's not pretend these differences don't exist when everyone who has ever used both languages knows them all to well.

by moe 12y ago

stefantalpalaru 12y ago

Try shell scripting.

Freaky 12y ago

Except Ruby isn't really significantly slower than Python?

dragonwriter 12y ago
The mainline implementations are not that far apart now, but IIRC it wasn't all that long ago that MRI was significantly slower than CPython.
- Freaky 12y ago
  I suppose it depends on how you define "that long ago" and "mainline implementations". From my point of view it's coming along to about half a decade, but I guess 1.8's remained popular in many places as recently as 2-3 years ago.
  - moe 12y ago
    The difference does not primarily stem from raw interpreter performance but rather from the different community mindsets and resulting ecosystems. The average code-quality in rubygems is just not very high. Consequently most libraries are completely oblivious to performance aspects. This reaches straight into the core infrastructure (rubygems, bundler) and all major projects (Rails). Leading to the simple fact that Ruby loses out on many practical benchmarks before your script has even loaded. Likewise the synergies of less than bright behaviors from all the gems in your average Rails project (and no least Rails itself) do indeed make the performance gap towards an average django project much larger than the mere difference in sheer interpreter performance. That's all not meant to bash Ruby anyway. It's a trade-off me and many others are willing to make, for the convenience that ruby provides after it has finally set its fat belly into motion. But let's not pretend these differences don't exist when everyone who has ever used both languages knows them all to well.