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.