# New to Python: my impression v. Perl/Ruby

**URL:** <https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774>\
**Category:** ruby-talk\
**Created:** [20 January 2004 21:00 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774 "2004-01-20T21:00:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 11\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ara.T.Howard](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a8b319/32.png) [@Ara.T.Howard](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ara.T.Howard)\
**Post date:** [22 January 2004 03:34 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/21 "2004-01-22T03:34:59Z")

</div>

that sounds like a meta-physical question gavin

😉

-a

> **···**
>
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2004, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> 
> > If I just want to do something 10 times, why should I involve ‘i’?
> 
> –
> 
> ATTN: please update your address books with address below!
> 
> ===============================================================================
> 
> > EMAIL :: Ara [dot] T [dot] Howard [at] noaa [dot] gov  
> > PHONE :: 303.497.6469  
> > ADDRESS :: E/GC2 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80305-3328  
> > STP :: [Solar-Terrestrial Physics Data | NCEI](http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/)  
> > NGDC :: [http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/](http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/)  
> > NESDIS :: [http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/](http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/)  
> > NOAA :: [http://www.noaa.gov/](http://www.noaa.gov/)  
> > US DOC :: [http://www.commerce.gov/](http://www.commerce.gov/)
> > 
> > The difference between art and science is that science is what we  
> > understand well enough to explain to a computer.  
> > Art is everything else.  
> > – Donald Knuth, “Discover”
> > 
> > /bin/sh -c ‘for l in ruby perl;do $l -e “print "\x3a\x2d\x29\x0a"”;done’  
> > ===============================================================================

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b487fb/32.png) [@gga](https://rubytalk.org/u/gga)\
**Post date:** [22 January 2004 10:50 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/22 "2004-01-22T10:50:02Z")

</div>

Dan Doel [djd15@po.cwru.edu](mailto:djd15@po.cwru.edu) wrote in message

> We probably shouldn’t use #each either, because you can override #each  
> to mean anything you want. Block creation also seems to be less expensive  
> than general object creation (or at least range creation), so the  
> performance  
> argument is incorrect.

That is indeed interesting! My idea that for loops were faster were  
taken from some ruby online docs stating that as one of the  
optimizations to do. I guess that was true of ruby1.6, perhaps. Or  
the author was just talking about arrays, only.  
If I turn the range into an array, the iteration itself is faster,  
thou.  
It seems for in and by itself is now slow in ruby1.8.1. And an even  
bigger surprise is to find that a while loop performs the slowest  
(almost twice as slow now!!!), when it is the one that is not  
constructing anything but an integer. Hmm…  
On the positive side, I guess this means there’s still quite some room  
for optimizing these on a future ruby version.

def do\_times(i)  
n = 0

```
i.times do
    n = n + 1
end

```

end

def do\_while(i)  
n = 0  
x = 0

while ( x \<= i )  
n = n + 1  
x = x + 1  
end  
end

def do\_each(i)  
n = 0

```
i.each do
    n = n + 1
end

```

end

def do\_for2(i)  
n = 0

```
for k in i
    n = n + 1
end

```

end

def do\_for(i)  
n = 0

```
for k in (0..i)
    n = n + 1
end

```

end

max = 10000000  
t1 = Time.new

do\_times max

t2 = Time.new  
puts "#times: ", t2 - t1

do\_for max

t3 = Time.new  
puts " for: ", t3 - t2

do\_while max

t4 = Time.new  
puts " while: ", t4 - t3

# Construct these without timing it,

# just to measure loop itself.

# Without turning it into an array, for

# is still slower. Maybe ruby iterates

# thru ranges internally by turning them into

# arrays first?

r = (0..max).to\_a

t5 = Time.new

do\_for2 r

t6 = Time.new

puts " for2: ", t6 - t5

do\_each r

t7 = Time.new

puts " each: ", t7 - t6

######## i got  
#times:  
6.659  
for:  
6.86  
while:  
12.097  
for2:  
6.55  
each:  
7.44

Hmmm… I found the code for ranges in the ruby source and I sort of  
understand why this would be so, but I cannot find the for or while  
entry functions to trace why this could be.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Robert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e95f7d/32.png) [@Robert](https://rubytalk.org/u/Robert)\
**Post date:** [22 January 2004 10:50 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/23 "2004-01-22T10:50:18Z")

</div>

“Joe Mason” [joe@notcharles.ca](mailto:joe@notcharles.ca) schrieb im Newsbeitrag  
news:slrnc0v1ru.pg0.joe@gate.notcharles.ca…

> In article [20040121155809.22006.00000323@mb-m22.aol.com](mailto:20040121155809.22006.00000323@mb-m22.aol.com), GGarramuno  
> wrote:
> 
> > for i in (0…i); something; end
> > 
> > to me has a bunch of advantages over times, step and the such. With  
> > the above  
> > construct you know that:  
> > a) i has to be a number  
> > b) i has to be positive for the loop to run  
> > c) there IS a loop after all, as ‘for’ indicates a loop in pretty much  
> > every  
> > computer language.  
> > d) it is more efficient as no blocks are created.  
> > e) you can change the starting point (ie. not start at 0).
> > 
> > With i.times() I really don’t get any of the above. One can asume  
> > that i.times  
> > means a loop as it is perhaps a common construct in ruby.  
> > But the truth is that i.times() also leaves room for that behavior to  
> > not be  
> > true. It could mean something else, too. It could be a fancy  
> > benchmarking  
> > object measuring the following block. Or any object with a times()  
> > method, for  
> > that matter.  
> > Pre-assuming it is a loop to me is not as obvious as with a for loop.  
> > And you always get the performance hit of opening a block, which is a  
> > big no-no  
> > to me when speed matters.
> 
> So, what you’re saying is, you don’t want to use Ruby’s features because  
> the same names could be used in other ways.

Even more: GGarramuno seems to suggest that a keyword or a name implies a  
certain semantics while this connection is purely conventional. Sure,  
many programming languages use “for” for looping, but this is nevertheless  
a convention and thus must be learned. The meaning of “times” can be  
learned the same way and the mnemonic isn’t really that bad, is it?

> That’s a fair reason to not use Ruby, I suppose. Feel free not to. But  
> you’re not going to convince anyone else with that argument.

Definitely not.

```
robert

```

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zach\_Dennis1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ea5d25/32.png) [@Zach\_Dennis1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Zach_Dennis1)\
**Post date:** [22 January 2004 21:44 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/24 "2004-01-22T21:44:30Z")

</div>

GGaramuno,

> but I had to read the line 2 or 3 times before I realized where times()  
> even was and where its block begun,

2 or 3 times? And you’re even a newbie!!! Amazing. Go look at some Perl code  
and tell me if it takes you less then 2 or 3 times to translate to yourself  
in your head.

Since you said you were a newbie to Ruby I’d like to state, “Don’t go  
ranting off how ruby is this and ruby is that.” It just doesn’t make sense  
to make those judgements because you use Python. Use both, then make a  
judgement call. I did. I picked Ruby at the end. 😉 I dont’ expect you to,  
but I’d expect you to use the language before judging it.

Zach

> **···**
>
> -----Original Message-----  
> From: GGarramuno [[mailto:GGarramuno@aol.com](mailto:GGarramuno@aol.com)]  
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:55 PM  
> To: ruby-talk ML  
> Subject: Re: New to Python: my impression v. Perl/Ruby
> 
> “John W. Kennedy” [jwkenne@attglobal.net](mailto:jwkenne@attglobal.net) wrote in message  
> news:[fpIPb.57035$OM2.16265939@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net](mailto:fpIPb.57035$OM2.16265939@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net)…
> 
> > tprime = (1 \<\< n) - 1  
> > test = 4  
> > (n - 2).times {test = (test \* test - 2) % tprime}  
> > puts “(2\*\*#{n})-1, #{tprime}, is prime” if test.zero?
> 
> Well, as a new user, that kind of constructs would scare me quite a  
> lot as an example of times() being used in real code.
> 
> Perhaps having been doing too much python has spoiled me, but I had to  
> read the line 2 or 3 times before I realized where times() even was  
> and where its block begun, unlike the previous clear examples using  
> do/end constructs.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Florian\_Gross](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9a140/32.png) [@Florian\_Gross](https://rubytalk.org/u/Florian_Gross)\
**Post date:** [23 January 2004 03:05 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/25 "2004-01-23T03:05:38Z")

</div>

GGarramuno wrote:

> Hmmm… I found the code for ranges in the ruby source and I sort of  
> understand why this would be so, but I cannot find the for or while  
> entry functions to trace why this could be.

Remember that the for item in items construct really is only an alias  
for items.each { |item| } and that its behavior can be changed by  
overloading each. (!)

Regards,  
Florian Gross

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ben\_Giddings1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/779978/32.png) [@Ben\_Giddings1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Ben_Giddings1)\
**Post date:** [26 January 2004 15:21 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/26 "2004-01-26T15:21:48Z")

</div>

Overall, I think it’s more Matz’ philosophy that you shouldn’t write  
your Ruby code based on how you think the Ruby interpreter will  
perform, but rather what seems most natural. Ruby is supposed to be  
easy for the programmer, not for the interpreter.

Aside from that, there’s the philosophy of “don’t optimize code too  
soon”. If a given loop is a problem when you’re done – then you can  
figure out how to speed things up at that point. Choosing a less  
intuitive loop construct because you have read it might be faster is  
probably a mistake from a maintenance and readability point of view,  
even if at this moment, it may be faster.

Ben

> **···**
>
> On Jan 22, 2004, at 05:50, GGarramuno wrote:
> 
> > That is indeed interesting! My idea that for loops were faster were  
> > taken from some ruby online docs stating that as one of the  
> > optimizations to do. I guess that was true of ruby1.6, perhaps. Or  
> > the author was just talking about arrays, only.  
> > If I turn the range into an array, the iteration itself is faster,  
> > thou.  
> > It seems for in and by itself is now slow in ruby1.8.1. And an even  
> > bigger surprise is to find that a while loop performs the slowest  
> > (almost twice as slow now!!!), when it is the one that is not  
> > constructing anything but an integer. Hmm…  
> > On the positive side, I guess this means there’s still quite some room  
> > for optimizing these on a future ruby version.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rove\_Monteux](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c4cdca/32.png) [@Rove\_Monteux](https://rubytalk.org/u/Rove_Monteux)\
**Post date:** [26 January 2004 15:34 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/27 "2004-01-26T15:34:56Z")

</div>

Thats great stuff, Ben.

Specially the “Ruby is supposed to be easy for the programmer, not for  
the interpreter.” is a great point, alone.

Nice one !

Cheers,

Rove Monteux

Ben Giddings wrote:

> **···**
>
> > On Jan 22, 2004, at 05:50, GGarramuno wrote:
> > 
> > > That is indeed interesting! My idea that for loops were faster were  
> > > taken from some ruby online docs stating that as one of the  
> > > optimizations to do. I guess that was true of ruby1.6, perhaps. Or  
> > > the author was just talking about arrays, only.  
> > > If I turn the range into an array, the iteration itself is faster,  
> > > thou.  
> > > It seems for in and by itself is now slow in ruby1.8.1. And an even  
> > > bigger surprise is to find that a while loop performs the slowest  
> > > (almost twice as slow now!!!), when it is the one that is not  
> > > constructing anything but an integer. Hmm…  
> > > On the positive side, I guess this means there’s still quite some room  
> > > for optimizing these on a future ruby version.
> > 
> > Overall, I think it’s more Matz’ philosophy that you shouldn’t write  
> > your Ruby code based on how you think the Ruby interpreter will  
> > perform, but rather what seems most natural.
> > 
> > Aside from that, there’s the philosophy of “don’t optimize code too  
> > soon”. If a given loop is a problem when you’re done – then you can  
> > figure out how to speed things up at that point. Choosing a less  
> > intuitive loop construct because you have read it might be faster is  
> > probably a mistake from a maintenance and readability point of view,  
> > even if at this moment, it may be faster.
> > 
> > Ben
> 
> –  
> Rove Monteux  
> Systems Administrator
> 
> [rove.monteux@fluid-rock.com](mailto:rove.monteux@fluid-rock.com)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![gga](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b487fb/32.png) [@gga](https://rubytalk.org/u/gga)\
**Post date:** [27 January 2004 09:45 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/28 "2004-01-27T09:45:06Z")

</div>

Ben Giddings [bg-rubytalk@infofiend.com](mailto:bg-rubytalk@infofiend.com) wrote in message news:[48F26B3C-5013-11D8-96DA-00039381462A@infofiend.com](mailto:48F26B3C-5013-11D8-96DA-00039381462A@infofiend.com)…

> Overall, I think it’s more Matz’ philosophy that you shouldn’t write  
> your Ruby code based on how you think the Ruby interpreter will  
> perform, but rather what seems most natural. Ruby is supposed to be  
> easy for the programmer, not for the interpreter.

Well, most natural to me would likely be something in Spanish as it is  
my native tongue, but I’m not holding my breath on ruby understanding  
that 🙂

Speaking seriously, I love that philosophy (and it is also why I  
prefer Ruby syntactically to python, where there is usually only one  
-very strict- way of doing things).  
But you are mistaken in thinking that I see times() and other integer  
constructs more readable. I honestly don’t.  
That’s why I prefer for/loops to all the other looping constructs as  
to me they are both more natural and more readable down the line, as  
was mentioned in the thread — to me it leaves less room to  
interpretation and confusion. No confusion about writing the block  
with brackets or not; much harder to place the loop in a single line;  
much more clear to know where the loop limits are, it forces you to  
use a looping variable, etc, etc. Performance is also a concern, but  
it goes together with the other issues, too. It is never as simple a  
decision as just choosing speed over all else. Of course, that is my  
opinion and it does not have to be yours.

Yet, for an open philosophy of accepting different similar idioms, all  
equivalent constructs have to perform at roughly equivalent speed.  
That is also something to be admired in Perl.

If not, whether you admit it or not, you are already “encouraging” the  
programmer into a way of writing code (not necessarily a bad idea,  
mind you, but you might as well go all the way and put this info in  
the docs and tutorials then).

> Aside from that, there’s the philosophy of “don’t optimize code too  
> soon”.

True, but all languages have constructs that are faster than others.  
And part of learning any language to me is also to know about those  
constructs and make a habit out of them (and teaching those constructs  
to others, too).  
Thus, even in a fast language such as C++, for example, I find it best  
to avoid writing i++ anywhere but when absolutely necessary, instead  
choosing the cheaper ++i. Nobody would accuse me of premature  
optimization for that, but it is a habit that comes in really useful  
once you start dealing with iterators and the STL, for example. If  
you learn that earlier in the language, you are better off than trying  
to relearn it years down the line, imho.

Ruby still being a young and evolving language makes this still a  
moving target, perhaps, but I’m sure that architecture decisions will  
always keep favoring some constructs over others.

> **···**
>
> > On Jan 22, 2004, at 05:50, GGarramuno wrote:

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Laurent\_Julliard4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ebca7d/32.png) [@Laurent\_Julliard4](https://rubytalk.org/u/Laurent_Julliard4)\
**Post date:** [27 January 2004 18:54 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/29 "2004-01-27T18:54:54Z")

</div>

I suppose that is ‘home language’ or ‘native language’. Tongue should  
be that in your mouth (I usually do the same error :=)

> **···**
>
> il 27 Jan 2004 01:40:56 -0800, [GGarramuno@aol.com](mailto:GGarramuno@aol.com) (GGarramuno) ha scritto::
> 
> > Well, most natural to me would likely be something in Spanish as it is  
> > my native tongue,

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gennady1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a4c791/32.png) [@Gennady1](https://rubytalk.org/u/Gennady1)\
**Post date:** [27 January 2004 18:59 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/30 "2004-01-27T18:59:41Z")

</div>

gabriele renzi wrote:

> il 27 Jan 2004 01:40:56 -0800, [GGarramuno@aol.com](mailto:GGarramuno@aol.com) (GGarramuno) ha  
> scritto::
> 
> > Well, most natural to me would likely be something in Spanish as it is  
> > my native tongue,
> 
> I suppose that is ‘home language’ or ‘native language’. Tongue should  
> be that in your mouth (I usually do the same error :=)

Actually, it is not an error. “Tongue” is quite acceptable replacement  
for “language” in expression “native language”.

Gennady.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![HAL\_9000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/90ced4/32.png) [@HAL\_9000](https://rubytalk.org/u/HAL_9000)\
**Post date:** [27 January 2004 19:03 UTC](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774/31 "2004-01-27T19:03:02Z")

</div>

gabriele renzi wrote:

> il 27 Jan 2004 01:40:56 -0800, [GGarramuno@aol.com](mailto:GGarramuno@aol.com) (GGarramuno) ha  
> scritto::
> 
> > Well, most natural to me would likely be something in Spanish as it is  
> > my native tongue,
> 
> I suppose that is ‘home language’ or ‘native language’. Tongue should  
> be that in your mouth (I usually do the same error :=)

It is not actually an error. “Tongue” can mean “language”  
even in English.

Hal

[Previous page](https://rubytalk.org/t/new-to-python-my-impression-v-perl-ruby/9774.md?page=1)