You are mistaken. Current, stable Perl and Python releases typically
execute programs much faster than Ruby. I suspected such rationalizing
and hostile replies in my initial post.
I'm jumping into the middle of the thread, but, I do believe
you're missing a few important points.
1. Most of us are already aware of ruby's speed.
1a. Many of us are able to write entire applications
in ruby today, and find that it's "fast enough"
for these applications.
- For example: I have written several internet
and web applications in ruby, and for my needs, ruby was plenty fast for these
1b. Some of us are writing applications for which
ruby is NOT fast enough, by a couple orders of
- For example: A 3D video game, with polygon
rendering, collision detection, physics,
monster AI, etc.
I am developing a 3D application, and I'm
writing as much code as I can in ruby.
But it doesn't matter if someone comes along
and says "ruby needs to be faster".
Ruby will NEVER, in any foreseeable future that
matters to the software I'm writing, be fast
enough to handle real-time rendering, physics,
and collision detection for a complex 3D
This is an important point I think you're not
realizing: It's not a matter that people don't
"want" ruby to be faster. There is just NO
KNOWN technical way to make ruby fast enough
for some applications.
Therefore, for my 3D application, I write as much
as I can in ruby, and code the rest in C.
Saying "ruby needs to be faster because I don't
want to learn C" is just nonsense for some kinds of applications. For these applications,
recommending C is not "rationalizing away ruby's
slowness" and it's not intended as a "hostile
response." It's just true, because there's NO KNOWN way to make ruby fast enough, no matter
how much you want it to be.
2. Probably anyone here will agree with the idea that
it would be *nice* for ruby to be faster, provided
we don't have to change the language to get the speed.
Did I leave anything out?
As I mentioned, ruby is _already_ fast enough for some
applications, and _will never be_ fast enough for others.
From: "Jamal Mazrui" <Jamal.Mazrui@fcc.gov>