« Return to Thread: performance questions
Re: performance questions
by Peter Booth-3
::
Rate this Message:
Those of us of a certain age grew up hearing the oversimplification
"compilers are fast, interpreters are slow"
I think the lesson from Java is that the compilation step can be more
effective when it has the benefit of having execution time data about
this instance's execution path/dataset. For this reason, the default
configuration of the Sun's server JVM is to not not compile a method
until its been executed 10,000 times. This is the primary reason that,
for most benchmarks, a Java implementation will perform better than a
C/C++ implementation.
There are many post 1.8.6 Ruby runtimes that offer significant
performance gains. For me, as someone who chooses to work on
performance focused projects, I think that the JRuby is most
compelling, because of the amazing toolset it implicitly brings with
it. Profilers like YourKit, Jxinsight and Wily are light-years ahead
of anything available to us on native Ruby 1.8.6 or any other
commercial software platform.
Peter
On Jun 15, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Mike Stephens wrote:
>
>> first candidate way is using compiler.
>
> A general question for everyone - I would have thought it would be
> quite
> difficult to write a complier for Ruby, in the sense that your script
> gets translated to machine code. Ruby is very late-binding and weakly
> typed so you can't predict what is going to be going on at run time. I
> see some ostensible Ruby compilers on web searches but are they
> genuine?
> Would they do anything for execution speed?
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
"compilers are fast, interpreters are slow"
I think the lesson from Java is that the compilation step can be more
effective when it has the benefit of having execution time data about
this instance's execution path/dataset. For this reason, the default
configuration of the Sun's server JVM is to not not compile a method
until its been executed 10,000 times. This is the primary reason that,
for most benchmarks, a Java implementation will perform better than a
C/C++ implementation.
There are many post 1.8.6 Ruby runtimes that offer significant
performance gains. For me, as someone who chooses to work on
performance focused projects, I think that the JRuby is most
compelling, because of the amazing toolset it implicitly brings with
it. Profilers like YourKit, Jxinsight and Wily are light-years ahead
of anything available to us on native Ruby 1.8.6 or any other
commercial software platform.
Peter
On Jun 15, 2009, at 4:56 AM, Mike Stephens wrote:
>
>> first candidate way is using compiler.
>
> A general question for everyone - I would have thought it would be
> quite
> difficult to write a complier for Ruby, in the sense that your script
> gets translated to machine code. Ruby is very late-binding and weakly
> typed so you can't predict what is going to be going on at run time. I
> see some ostensible Ruby compilers on web searches but are they
> genuine?
> Would they do anything for execution speed?
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
« Return to Thread: performance questions
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |
