Ruby <> slow

To all the shitheads saying "Ruby is slow" as fuck:
"Ruby is slow" is a myth. Ruby is slow for certain types of problems, but there are ways to fix this by being a competent programmer and also by using wrapper classes of fast C/C++ or Java libraries and also by not using Ruby for problems it is ill-suited to.

Ruby > Python

All accusations towards Ruby are just ridiculous and are factually inaccurate! It is important that as a community we debunk these myths and unjustified criticisms. An even better road to take would be to provide examples of how computationally complex problems can be dealt with efficiently in Ruby, highlighting the best practices and the existing workarounds.

A religious community is emotionally easy to attack and may produce inopportune responses in defense of whatever has been questioned. Over the past three years I’ve heard a few bad things about Ruby and I’ve seen all sorts of responses, which in some cases were simply overreactions.

Ruby is a wonderfully designed language. The Ruby and Ruby on Rails communities have a lot of passion. We love our language, created by a very cool guy (and maestro of humbleness) in Japan. We love our framework authored by a Danish GAP model, and we really enjoy the spirit in the community. We have the best non-paid marketing department in the world. We started the revolution which is powering most of the new social websites out there.

Ruby on Rails is the single most important and valuable technical solution, language and tool for software problems.

If Ruby isn't slow then why is Twitter porting to Java and Scala?

>>4
Because Ruby is not webscale.

The problem with Ruby is that it doesn't excel at anything. It may do its job, but it won't do it any better than a language tailored for that purpose.

The other problem is that it uses an interpreter, which reduces code execution speed by a factor of 2-3x.

I'm sure there are more problems, however, in the name of brevity...

Why use a language that produces poorly executed code when you can use something like C?

ffs, even Lisp is better than Ruby.

>>6

Why use Ruby when you can use C? Are you serious?

Ruby code may be slower, but it is faster to write. The tradeoff is obvious: programmer time vs CPU time.

>>7
Ruby code may be slower, but it is faster to write.
How do you measure the speed of writing?

>>7
APL is even faster to write. You should be using APL.

>>8

With a time measuring device, a "clock" if you will.

The following function "life", written in Dyalog APL, takes a boolean matrix and calculates the new generation according to Conway's Game of Life. It demonstrates the power of APL to implement a complex algorithm in very little code

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/ff/LifeInApl.gif

>>10
And what process do you measure?

>>12

The amount of time it takes for the programmer to implement the program.

>>13
What kind of program?

>>13
What kind of programmer? (unexperienced user, CS student, seasoned pro, academy professor)
What kind of implementation? (prototype, production code)

>>14-15

Assuming an average length program written by a spherical programmer with an average length beard

>>16
Perfectly spherical or not?

>>16
average
http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html

There is some truth in the claim that Ruby doesn’t really give us anything that wasn’t there long ago in Lisp and Smalltalk, but they weren’t bad languages. -- Matthew Huntbach

>>1

So Ruby is either less than or greater than slow? Does that mean that Ruby could be slower than slow?

Ruby is slow because it is poorly designed. It's overcomplicated semantics make for a difficult to optimize interpreter, and its silly irregular syntax makes for a slow parser/lexer.

If it ain't Lisp it's crap.

>and also by using wrapper classes of fast C/C++ or Java libraries

You know you hit the bottom of performance when you need to wrap "fast" java libraries.

>>22
Java is almost as fast as C++: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/compare.php?lang=java

>>23
biased benchmarks

>>24
Prove it.

>>23
... when you write in very primitive subset of java. Namely: no Vector<Integer> allowed.  shootout is not what real java code looks and works like.

Have you tried to play swing port of nullpomino?

>>6
`confounding efficiency with correctness

Back to Slashdot.org, please.

>>26
Minecraft

>>28
Crisis.

lul

>>26
shootout is not what real anything code looks and works like.

and the benchmarks are nothing like actual performance bottlenecks.

It's entirely meaningless.

>>6
The other problem is that it uses an interpreter, which reduces code execution speed by a factor of 2-3x.
No, it's much slower than that.

Ruby was designed by one guy using yacc, you cant expect it to be a fast language. The Ruby community has to contract out to a company that makes compilers to get an industrial grade optimized compiler.

I dont think the problems that Twitter have had are anything to do with Ruby but rather how Rails handles database concurrency

Anyway, what's the point of Ruby and Python when Perl and Lisp dialects do everything they do and much more more efficiently and more cleanly?

>>34
Perl syntax cleaner than Python or Ruby? You have no idea what youre even talking about

>>35
Perl 6 is.

>>36
Perl 6 has nothing to do with Perl, its an entirely new language that should be renamed

It's my ruby anniversary

I don't understand why we cling to syntax. It's "readable" only in the most superficial and dumb ways.

>>38
You're 40?  Holy shit.  Also >>40 get.

No, that was one of the first things that was scrapped mechanically. Once you unlock a class you can grind it for as long as you want.

 Perverted old man has been influenced by nigger culture