I have used Ruby and some others (Perl, Python, etc.) for some useful things. Those who know these languages, don’t need to say why. But when it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself (Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C. To my knowledge, most advanced chess programs (Deep Blue, Fritz, Junior, Shredder, etc.) are written in either C or C++, never Prolog or Lisp. Mastering C/C++ is still required when it comes to performance. If a chess program in Ruby can beat all those chess programs in C/C++, no naive propaganda for Ruby needs to be made. So far I haven’t spotted any Job that requires Ruby, but the trio C++/Java/C#; most companies and managers are very well informed.
Even with my naivete, I can sense “trolling” – in other words, an
attempt (the second one, by my count) to start a flame war.
I have used Ruby and some others (Perl, Python, etc.) for some useful
things. Those who know these languages, don’t need to say why. But
when it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself
(Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C. To my
knowledge, most advanced chess programs (Deep Blue, Fritz, Junior,
Shredder, etc.) are written in either C or C++, never Prolog or Lisp.
Mastering C/C++ is still required when it comes to performance. If a
chess program in Ruby can beat all those chess programs in C/C++, no
naive propaganda for Ruby needs to be made. So far I haven’t spotted
any Job that requires Ruby, but the trio C++/Java/C#; most companies
and managers are very well informed.
<image.tiff>
···
On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 12:22 PM, Dat Nguyen wrote:
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
Maybe the solution here is to start a Ruby-In-Hardware project,
and embed a Ruby core directly into microcode. Something like
Chuck Moore did when designing the SH-BOOM and MuP21 chips for
FORTH.
http://www.ultratechnology.com/mup21.html
Then we wouldn’t have to worry about performance any more.
-mark. ( 
)
···
At 02:22 AM 11/22/2002 +0900, Dat wrote:
But when it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself
(Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C.
Obiously a troll, but I couldn’t resist…
In article F25TDhtWrwuVjtQUGUz000118da@hotmail.com,
I have used Ruby and some others (Perl, Python, etc.) for some useful things. Those who know these languages, don't need to say why. But when it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself (Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C. To my knowledge, most advanced chess programs (Deep Blue, Fritz, Junior, Shredder, etc.) are written in either C or C++, never Prolog or Lisp. Mastering C/C++ is still required when it comes to performance. If a chess program in Ruby can beat all those chess programs in C/C++, no naive propaganda for Ruby needs to be made.
Well, if the only criteria for a language being viable is that you can
write a fast chess program in it, then I suppose you’re right. And of
course since chess programs are so important we should all drop what we’re
working on and start our own chess projects. I’ll start the trend: That
TaskMaster thingy is now gonna become ChessMaster. No more of those
useless web apps - it’s all chess all the time.
Hey, wait, assembler is even faster than C! Let’s implement our chess
programs in assembler. Surely you have shown us a new path to
enlightenment and for this we thank you.
So far I haven’t spotted any Job that requires Ruby, but the trio
C++/Java/C#; most companies and managers are very well
informed.
companies and managers rule, dude!
STOP MORE SPAM with href="http://g.msn.com/8HMJEN/2015">the new MSN 8 and get 2 months >FREE* >
Hey, wait, this is advertising (SPAM)!
Phil
···
Dat Nguyen thucdat@hotmail.com wrote:
Dat Nguyen wrote:
I have used Ruby and some others (Perl, Python, etc.) for some useful
things. Those who know these languages, don’t need to say why. But when
it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself (Ruby, Perl,
Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C.
Yes, C is “awesome”. Be sure to use that word a lot at your next job
interview. Also the part about chess-playing software; I think that’s a
very hot topic for recruiters as well.
P. S.
I was searching the web to see if you’ve been offering equally helpful
advice to other newsgroups. Are you the same Dat Nguyen
(NFL - Players Rosters - National Football League - ESPN) that plays
for the Dallas Cowboys?
Obiously a troll, but I couldn’t resist…
Well, if the only criteria for a language being viable is that you can
write a fast chess program in it, then I suppose you’re right. And of
course since chess programs are so important we should all drop what we’re
working on and start our own chess projects. I’ll start the trend: That
TaskMaster thingy is now gonna become ChessMaster. No more of those
useless web apps - it’s all chess all the time.Hey, wait, assembler is even faster than C! Let’s implement our chess
programs in assembler. Surely you have shown us a new path to
enlightenment and for this we thank you.
Wouldn’t a hardwired ASIC be much faster than assembly?
And, if I add a little liquid nitrogen or oxygen, then
I can really get that program to fly.
So far I haven’t spotted any Job that requires Ruby, but the trio
C++/Java/C#; most companies and managers are very well
informed.companies and managers rule, dude!
Yes, my experience is that all companies and managers always
know what the best technology is. Those techy employees are
just scientific clerks for the boss man anyway.
Even with my naivete, I can sense “trolling” – in other words, an
attempt (the second one, by my count) to start a flame war.
Well, the first one (“this is not real”) I ascribed maybe to lack of
understanding of English subtleties. The second convinces me you are
right. After all, anyone who reads Dilbert knows "most companies
and managers are very well informed" is totally “not real!”
Regards,
Kent Starr
···
On Thu, 2002-11-21 at 13:00, Mark Wilson wrote:
On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 12:22 PM, Dat Nguyen wrote:
I have used Ruby and some others (Perl, Python, etc.) for
some useful things. Those who know these languages, don’t need to say
why. But when it comes to the ultimate application like a language
itself (Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C. To
my knowledge, most advanced chess programs (Deep Blue, Fritz, Junior,
Shredder, etc.) are written in either C or C++, never Prolog or Lisp.
Mastering C/C++ is still required when it comes to performance. If a
chess program in Ruby can beat all those chess programs in C/C++, no
naive propaganda for Ruby needs to be made. So far I haven’t spotted
any Job that requires Ruby, but the trio C++/Java/C#; most companies
and managers are very well informed.<<image.tiff>
STOP MORE SPAM with 1999,1999,FFFFthe
new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
“Phil Tomson” ptkwt@shell1.aracnet.com wrote in message
news:arj9m7018of@enews1.newsguy.com…
Hey, wait, assembler is even faster than C! Let’s implement our chess
programs in assembler. Surely you have shown us a new path to
enlightenment and for this we thank you.
Actually, a good macroassembler can be pretty productive. It’s really too
bad there are so few good low-level tools left. You get closures and what
not pretty easily and its dynamically typed. I’m not even kidding - half the
time spent in C is second guessing what assembly language will come out the
other end. It’s just that assembler isn’t all that portable. And of course -
today an assembler would have to help you optimizing the processor pipeline
by suggesting instruction reordering etc.
Mikkel
In article 5.1.0.14.2.20021121134539.021f0388@zcard04k.ca.nortel.com,
···
Mark Probert probertm@nortelnetworks.com wrote:
At 02:22 AM 11/22/2002 +0900, Dat wrote:
But when it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself
(Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C.Maybe the solution here is to start a Ruby-In-Hardware project,
and embed a Ruby core directly into microcode. Something like
Chuck Moore did when designing the SH-BOOM and MuP21 chips for
FORTH.MuP21--A High Performance MISC Processor
Then we wouldn’t have to worry about performance any more.
-mark. (
It would be pretty hard to implememnt Ruby in Hardware given it’s dynamic
nature…
Phil
“Mark Probert” probertm@nortelnetworks.com wrote in message
news:5.1.0.14.2.20021121134539.021f0388@zcard04k.ca.nortel.com…
But when it comes to the ultimate application like a language itself
(Ruby, Perl, Python, etc.), nothing can beat the awesome C.
Maybe the solution here is to start a Ruby-In-Hardware project,
and embed a Ruby core directly into microcode. Something like
Chuck Moore did when designing the SH-BOOM and MuP21 chips for
FORTH.
FORTH is too easy, here’s TCL
http://www.gmvhdl.com/acrodesign/TclOnBoard.ppt
http://www.gmvhdl.com/acrodesign/research.html
Mikkel
···
At 02:22 AM 11/22/2002 +0900, Dat wrote:
In article 20021121155612.A21573@freeze.org,
Obiously a troll, but I couldn’t resist…
Well, if the only criteria for a language being viable is that you can
write a fast chess program in it, then I suppose you’re right. And of
course since chess programs are so important we should all drop what we’re
working on and start our own chess projects. I’ll start the trend: That
TaskMaster thingy is now gonna become ChessMaster. No more of those
useless web apps - it’s all chess all the time.Hey, wait, assembler is even faster than C! Let’s implement our chess
programs in assembler. Surely you have shown us a new path to
enlightenment and for this we thank you.Wouldn’t a hardwired ASIC be much faster than assembly?
That’s pretty much what IBM did with Deep Blue.
And, if I add a little liquid nitrogen or oxygen, then
I can really get that program to fly.
OK, it’s off to comp.arch.fpga!
Phil
···
Jim Freeze jim@freeze.org wrote:
On Friday, 22 November 2002 at 4:16:22 +0900, Phil Tomson wrote:
I would think that you could take the core interpreter and the built-in
library, less File* and Dir and implement them in silicon.
If you included flash support, then you could have File* and Dir and user
space for add-ons. Add an ether controller and drivers and then all the
Net services become available …
(laugh)
Ruby – The Operating System … watch this space!
-mark.
···
At 10:56 AM 11/22/2002 +0900, Phil wrote:
It would be pretty hard to implememnt Ruby in Hardware given it’s dynamic
nature…
Very cool!
So it is possible …
Now to find the right application.
-mark.
···
At 11:16 AM 11/22/2002 +0900, Mikkel wrote:
Maybe the solution here is to start a Ruby-In-Hardware project,
and embed a Ruby core directly into microcode. Something like
Chuck Moore did when designing the SH-BOOM and MuP21 chips for
FORTH.FORTH is too easy, here’s TCL
http://www.gmvhdl.com/acrodesign/TclOnBoard.ppt
http://www.gmvhdl.com/acrodesign/research.html