Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
> My tests (looking for the benchmark code now.. without much luck thus
> far..) stressed file read and object allocation ops, rather than
> aiming for a 'pure CPU' test of Ruby.  I did this because I feel it
> best reflects running test suites, and that's the slowest thing I do
> with Ruby. Heh.
> 
> In that kind of environment, the gap between Linux and Win32 was much,
> much wider.  This makes me believe it is a platform problem, not
> (mostly) a compiler issue.  I get 0% speedup on this test by switching
> from VC6 to VC7.1, and I tried twenty or thirty different combinations
> of compiler flags.

In a related development, it took some doing, but I managed to get the
CygWin compiler to build Ruby today. On a P4 compiled with O2 and
"march=pentium4" it was still a dead heat between the recompiled Cygwin
Ruby and the One-Click Ruby on my matrix benchmark. I managed to get a
*very small* improvement by going to O3. Not enough to claim success, in
other words.

I'm probably going to load the Beta Windows Vista Ani B so graciously
handed out at RubyConf on my Athlon T-Bird, since I just stuffed a new
hard drive in it. Once that's done, I'll grab Visual Studio Express and
SQL Server 2005 express and see what sort of magic I can make happen
with NTFS.
> 
>