On Jul 3, 2012, at 01:47 , Lars Haugseth wrote:

> On 07/03/2012 03:34 AM, botp wrote:
>>=20
>> $ for x in "ruby ruby1.rb" "ruby ruby2.rb" "perl perl1.pl"; do echo
>> $x;  time $x;echo ; done
>=20
> Note that the overhead for starting up and exiting the interpreter has =
an impact on your results when you benchmark like that.
>=20
> $ time for i in {0..100}; do ruby -e ''; done
>=20
> real	0m2.395s
> user	0m1.600s
> sys	0m0.628s
>=20
> $ time for i in {0..100}; do perl -e ''; done
>=20
> real	0m0.526s
> user	0m0.176s
> sys	0m0.300s
>=20
> (Ruby 1.9.3, Perl 5.14.2.)

Oh my god... are you guys still mentarbating over this crap?

First off... compare apples to apples. ruby 1.9 loads rubygems by =
default.

4605 % time for i in {0..100}; do ruby19 -e ''; done

real	0m3.089s
user	0m2.066s
sys	0m0.663s

4606 % time for i in {0..100}; do ruby19 --disable-gems -e ''; done

real	0m1.414s
user	0m0.771s
sys	0m0.438s

Second. Be glad you're not running python or anything on the jvm =
(compare `time gem list` vs `time jgem list`):

4604 % time for i in {0..100}; do python -c ''; done

real	0m14.186s
user	0m11.212s
sys	0m1.717s

Third... WHO CARES?!?!? This is all bullshit comparisons for bullshit =
reasons. You don't use ruby for speed of runtime. You use it because =
you'll be done AND have profiled and optimized the bottlenecks before =
they're done. You use it because it's a great language to develop in. =
You use it to GET STUFF DONE and AVOID THESE THREADS.