On Mon, 24 Jan 2005, Eric Hodel wrote:

> On 22 Jan 2005, at 23:57, Lothar Scholz wrote:
>
>> Hello Eric,
>> 
>> EH> Ruby is fast enough
>> EH> for everybody here, and its fast enough for basecamphq.com and
>> EH> 43things.com.
>> 
>> But since the ruby community is still very very small this is maybe
>> not a very clever answer.
>
> Commonly, it is the truth.  By omitting my full response though, you 
> misrepresent my statement.
>
> Writing C extensions in Ruby is hardly more difficult than writing plain Ruby 
> code, and with a tool like RubyInline, it only gets easier.  Beacuse of this, 
> many people find no problem using Ruby despite it being slower than other 
> languages.

So you're saying the common truth is that Ruby is fast enough, but only if you 
don't use Ruby but instead C?

I think it discourages the community from focusing on things like bytecode, 
which could solve the problem. Because you're speaking as if using C *is* using 
Ruby. When instead it's a different language that can be used to work around 
the slowness.

It is better than to go the road of tcl, IMO. Denying that slowness is bad, and 
so never fixing it.

--
RubyPanther