#: the mind was *winged* after Alexandru Popescu said on 6/12/2005 6:15 PM :#
> #: the mind was *winged* after Austin Ziegler said on 6/12/2005 5:53 PM :#
>> On 6/12/05, Steven Jenkins <steven.jenkins / ieee.org> wrote:
>>> In my line of work, we use benchmarks and statistics extensively. They
>>> may be useful for lying; so what? They are far more powerful for telling
>>> the truth.
>> 
>> And there's the real tragedy. People who buy into the crap that is benchmarks.
>> 
>> There is only one benchmark that truly matters. Are your users
>> complaining about the speed of your program? If so, then you need to
>> optimise it. If not, then it's good enough.
>> 
>> Everything else is lies and marketing. Things like the alioth
>> benchmarks don't actually shed any light on anything; they are great
>> at obscuring. Nothing more.
>> 
>> -austin
> 
> Austin, I am still wondering: you develop f.e. 3 months to find out if your client will accept the
> software you have invested into? All the companies I have been employed into were not working like
> this. We have always built prototypes and decided from that point. And a prototype is a benchmark in
> fact.
> 
> Also, I agree with the fact the optimization comes later in the dev cycles. But we need to have the
> doors open to optimize. Moreover, I read that in Ruby you can always go and code the hot spots in C.
>  What if you don't have these resources? Which are the costs to bring such a resource and make him
> productive?
> 
> Maybe I am completely wrong, but this is the way the companies I have worked with are proceeding.
> 
> :alex |.::the_mindstorm::.|
> 
> 
> 
You may wonder why I keep saying this kind of things.
I want to understand how you ruby working guys are managing this. Usually only the success stories
go public, but I know behind these there are lots of failures.

:alex |.::the_mindstorm::.|