------art_19908_655762.1213103713831
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 8:19 AM, Jochen Theodorou <blackdrag / uni.de> wrote:

> Charles Oliver Nutter schrieb:
>
>> Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>>
>>> well, looking at these numbers I would suggest you subscribe to the jruby
>>> mailing list and ask why jruby is 100% slower than ruby ;) The server mode
>>> really looks awful... They need to know about this!
>>>
>>
>> You are here trolling on the Ruby lists Jochen? Don't you have some Groovy
>> bugs to be fixing? :)
>>
>
> ah, I didn't try to troll, I put so many ;) in.
>
>  The server VM starts up a lot slower on most systems, which is the reason
>> for this test to be invalid. And in general, any benchmark under 5-10s is
>> going to be a pretty poor test of JRuby performance, since the code might
>> not even get compiled or optimized on such a short run.
>>
>
> well, ok, but it was:
>
>  *jruby -J-server sudoku01final.rb*
>> Elapsed Time: 2.474
>> Elapsed Time: 2.467
>> Elapsed Time: 2.347
>> Elapsed Time: 2.404
>> Elapsed Time: 2.326
>> Elapsed Time: 2.414
>>
>
> that's  >12s... unless he did start over again and again, but I assumed
> that is not the case because of:
>
> *JRuby executions:* Elapsed Time: 0.888 [...]
>
> vs.
>
> *JRuby:
> jruby sudoku01final.rb
> Elapsed Time: 1.058 Secs*
>
> but maybe I was wrong.
>
> bye Jochen
>
>
Team,

I'll be more than happy to send the code to someone or just put it here as
an attachment.
The way I executed the code was by opening a DOS (cmd) session on XP.
I typed the command as described above: *jruby sudoku01final.rb* multiple
times. Then I did the same for ruby:  *ruby sudoku01final.rb.*
Although the code is not great code, that does not really matter since the
same "bad" or "good" code was executed unmodified under both environments.
Let me know if anyone wants to see and run the code for testing!

Thank you

Victor

------art_19908_655762.1213103713831--