[Ironruby-core] Will the performance catch up be next milestone?

Charles Strahan charles.c.strahan at gmail.com
Thu Jul 29 01:45:02 EDT 2010


IronRuby is exciting because it brings Windows, Ruby and .NET together as
one.  There are plenty of cases where deploying to Windows would either be
ideal, or in some cases, a must.  Imagine developing a Ruby app that needs
to integrate with Sharepoint, or Great Plains; how would you go about doing
so?  You could implement web services in C++, or perhaps C#... but then you
have several languages to deal with and multiple code bases to manage, as
opposed to a single Ruby app.

Enter IronRuby.  Now you have the ability to harness the all of the Windows
oriented .NET libraries *from* Ruby.  You could use DRb, or perhaps RESTful
services using Sinatra, and then consume those services from a Rails app.
So, while I agree that I'd rather deploy my main app to a linux box, it's
great to know that I can use IronRuby on Windows to seamlessly integrate
with Microsoft solutions.  I would imagine that it's these sorts of
situations that Microsoft is banking on (as well as scripting scenarios and
such).

-Charles

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Nathan Stults <Nathan_Stults at hsihealth.com
> wrote:

> Yeah, but who wants to **deploy** Ruby code on Windows? Develop, sure…but
> then performance doesn’t matter. If IronRuby is aiming only to be a windows
> centric technology, I can’t imagine what future it really has in store for
> it, that is, standing alone on its own two feet as a Ruby implementation.
> Integrated into .NET software is a different story irrelevant to the
> benchmarks being discussed, but I don’t think the benchmarks are misleading
> as far as the Ruby community at large is concerned, because for that group,
> I don’t imagine Windows is a viable deployment target ( why would it be?) so
> benchmarking on Linux is probably the most realistic kind of benchmarking
> you can do when comparing ruby interpreters for that particular audience. I
> suppose that is one of the things that makes the IronRuby project an enigma
> to me – in my mind Ruby is a finger pointing to Linux, so it seems an odd
> one for Microsoft to extend.
>
>
>
> *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:
> ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 28, 2010 8:59 PM
> *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] Will the performance catch up be next
> milestone?
>
>
>
> It's probably not intentional but his benchmark graphs are misleading.
>
>
>
> Because Mono is not nearly as fast or as mature as Microsoft's .NET, the
> performance of IronRuby on mono is much worse. Unfortunately all his graphs
> show Mono performance only, which makes IronRuby appear very slow.
>
>
>
> If you look at the numbers directly (there is a table further down
> comparing IronRuby on mono vs IronRuby on .net), IronRuby is much much
> faster. It appears to me that IronRuby on windows (.NET) is faster than MRI
> 1.9.2 ("regular" ruby) on windows!
>
>
>
> It's still not as fast as MRI 1.9.2 on linux, but it's not that far behind
> either.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 2:58 PM, Ray Linn <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>
> IBM Engineer completed a performance benchmark for rubys, seems ir does
> not well done in the performance.
>
>
> http://programmingzen.com/2010/07/19/the-great-ruby-shootout-july-2010/
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> Ironruby-core mailing list
> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ironruby-core mailing list
> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100729/16dd371d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Ironruby-core mailing list