On 9/26/05, Isaac Gouy <igouy / yahoo.com> wrote:
> Austin Ziegler wrote:
>> On 9/26/05, Isaac Gouy <igouy / yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Martin, perhaps you could collect this stuff and put it into your wiki
>>> page for future use?
>>>
>>> Austin Ziegler wrote:
>>>> On 9/26/05, Isaac Gouy <igouy / yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Have you even looked at the website in the last 6 months?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. The text that makes a lie of everything you claim about the site
>>>> is still there on the front page, as of 26 September 2005 15.55 EDT.
>>>
>>> And that text would be?
>>
>> Assuming that you actually care, look it up on the archives. The text
>> has not improved since the last time we talked about the alioth
>> shootout.
>
> Martin DeMello suggested collecting complaints on a wiki page, so every
> 3 weeks when someone asks about Ruby performance on the shootout, they
> can simply be directed to all the complaints you've already made.
>
> If for some reason you don't feel able to mention the "text that makes
> a lie of everything you claim about the site" here - just savage it on
> the wiki page.
>
> http://rubygarden.org/ruby?BenchMarks

No, Isaac, I'm not going to do your homework for you anymore.

>> Incorrect. With a *single* shell command, I can make the Ruby
>> Ackermann run perfectly (and, IIRC, better than the Python
>> equivalent, or at least to deeper recursion depths even with the
>> Python language "cheat"). This isn't undocumented; this has been
>> mentioned to you since January. It has *nothing* to do with the
>> implementation of the Ruby Ackermann, but the default stack size
>> allocated to the Ruby process. It's more restrictive under Windows,
>> and that is probably a compile-time option, but again -- it's *not* a
>> Ruby problem. It's a problem in your methodology and your
>> assumptions. If you've screwed up there, where *else* have you
>> screwed up?
> More abuse? So much for Martin Fowler's Ruby People meme.
>
> Is there seem reason the approaches suggested by Bill Kelly and Florian
> Franks are unacceptable?

I'm a nice person, except to people who demonstrate themselves to be
willfully dishonest, obstinate, and ignorant.

The approaches suggested by Bill and Florian aren't acceptable because
they run Ruby and then shell out to run the program again after making
the necessary environment change. It runs, but it'd be better if you
just fixed your run script.

-austin
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin / halostatue.ca