So what your saying is that the VM is part of Ruby? I think your analogy would be better stated that a speed comparison between a Nissan Cube and a Nissan GT-R is invalid because they were driven on different tracks for the time trials.

In that case, IT would be valid.

-------


The claim is that 1.9.1, in its entirety, is generally faster than 1.8.6, in its entirety.  The data backs that up.  (I'm looking at the "A faster Ruby on Windows is possible (benchmarks for 4 implementations inside)" benchmark.)  The fact that a new VM (YARV) is part of what makes 1.9.1 different from 1.8.6 is irrelevant.  If you trying to assert that the different VM is the _only_ reason for the performance, then yes, that would be a bad claim, because there are too many other variables and changes involved.  But they didn't; the comparison was between 1.9.1 and 1.8.6.

Your statement is a little akin to saying a speed comparison between a Nissan Cube and a Nissan GT-R is invalid because they have different engines.  Well, of course they have different engines; that's part of what makes them different vehicles.