Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 110 posts

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#21

Post by nurettin »

burlesona wrote: post #17
bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #9

I'm sad Ruby has been, or is, left behind by python. There are lots of little reasons but no real big one. I just love ruby. I love little things like 'unless'. I know it's still with us, but still feels a little sad.

I don’t really think it’s so much that Ruby has declined in popularity (although Rails has), but that Python has exploded as it moved from Academia into data science and ML which are really big right now. Ruby only ever has one big ecosystem (web development), whereas Python has expanded into several. But Ruby isn’t going anywhere, so no need to be sad. It’s still a joyful scripting language, and its community is ali…

I used to watch rubygems.org rss to keep myself in the loop. Nowadays it is a deserted wasteland. Many previously popular gems never updated and thus do not work on newer versions of ruby.

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#22

Post by hetman »

bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #9

I'm sad Ruby has been, or is, left behind by python. There are lots of little reasons but no real big one. I just love ruby. I love little things like 'unless'. I know it's still with us, but still feels a little sad.

I still think Ruby is the more interesting and expressive language. However, for me there's a single pain point that means Python wins in any larger project. That is the behaviour of Python's "import" vs. Ruby's "require". So it's not surprising that this distinction between these languages pops up all over the place. Python tries to be as explicit as possible. While "from import *" is possible it is heavily frowned upon. The Ruby culture doesn't seem to have such qualms; things are often much more hidden and magical. It can make navigating larger projects... even your own... difficult and inefficient.

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#23

Post by altdatathrow »

bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #9

I'm sad Ruby has been, or is, left behind by python. There are lots of little reasons but no real big one. I just love ruby. I love little things like 'unless'. I know it's still with us, but still feels a little sad.

Thorsten Ball's writeup [1] on the architecture behind Unicorn is one of the single most informative pieces I've ever read about fork-based multiprocessing, signals, and pipe-based ipc. The information there can be applied to any platform and, imo, is a must-read for anyone operating in a *nix environment.

[1] https://thorstenball.com/blog/2014/11/20/unicorn-unix-magic-...

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#24

Post by chillfox »

non-entity wrote: post #15
bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #9

I'm sad Ruby has been, or is, left behind by python. There are lots of little reasons but no real big one. I just love ruby. I love little things like 'unless'. I know it's still with us, but still feels a little sad.

I was intrigued by it for a while. I can remember the jokes from years ago that it should be renamed the Rails programming language. I find it a shame when an otherwise interesting language gets pigeonholed into single framework.

For sure. Ruby is great for things other than rails, like automation, writing server scripts, and of course small api servers/web sites using sinatra.

I use it all the time and still haven't actually done anything with Rails.

The last thing I wrote in Ruby was a script to help manage my email inbox using imap.

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#25

Post by samtheprogram »

hetman wrote: post #22
bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #9

I'm sad Ruby has been, or is, left behind by python. There are lots of little reasons but no real big one. I just love ruby. I love little things like 'unless'. I know it's still with us, but still feels a little sad.

I still think Ruby is the more interesting and expressive language. However, for me there's a single pain point that means Python wins in any larger project. That is the behaviour of Python's "import" vs. Ruby's "require". So it's not surprising that this distinction between these languages pops up all over the place. Python tries to be as explicit as possible. While "from import *" is possible it is heavily frowned…

I can echo this sentiment. I want to love Ruby, but when I work in project in it, I eventually get to point where I have trouble finding where something is defined, which wastes my time — and in general, to your point, it’s harder to find where anything that’s getting pulled into a file is defined. Unfortunately, this dynamism is a concept in Ruby that is part of the reason why it’s so great.

However, recently I started a project with Ruby, thanks to language servers. I’m hoping this solves that issue, but it’s too soon to say.

There’s still other issues with the require mechanism, and Ruby in general, and other languages to try, e.g. Elixir and Crystal. I haven’t been sold yet in terms of what Ruby excels at, and those languages are each different in their own right.

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#26

Post by survili »

samtheprogram wrote: post #25
hetman wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still think Ruby is the more interesting and expressive language. However, for me there's a single pain point that means Python wins in any larger project. That is the behaviour of Python's "import" vs. Ruby's "require". So it's not surprising that this distinction between these languages pops up all over the place. Python tries to be as explicit as possible. While "from import *" is possible it is heavily frowned…

I can echo this sentiment. I want to love Ruby, but when I work in project in it, I eventually get to point where I have trouble finding where something is defined, which wastes my time — and in general, to your point, it’s harder to find where anything that’s getting pulled into a file is defined. Unfortunately, this dynamism is a concept in Ruby that is part of the reason why it’s so great. However, recently I star…

Come on, use Rubymine or any other smart editor to find definitions..

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#28

Post by t-writescode »

survili wrote: post #26
samtheprogram wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can echo this sentiment. I want to love Ruby, but when I work in project in it, I eventually get to point where I have trouble finding where something is defined, which wastes my time — and in general, to your point, it’s harder to find where anything that’s getting pulled into a file is defined. Unfortunately, this dynamism is a concept in Ruby that is part of the reason why it’s so great. However, recently I star…

Come on, use Rubymine or any other smart editor to find definitions..

I've been using Ruby in IntelliJ for nearly a year now at my new job. Up until literally the very most recent version of it, this has definitely not been enough to be able find some methods.

Like, ... 'move' or 'read', or some other horribly overloaded function that is the one that I need to go and find the specific implementation of because it's busted.

You need more than just Rubymine in many cases.

And no, sometimes it's quite difficult to get the exact configuration required to get that code path to figure out what's wrong.

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#29

Post by lloeki »

hetman wrote: post #22
bfieidhbrjr wrote: post #9

I'm sad Ruby has been, or is, left behind by python. There are lots of little reasons but no real big one. I just love ruby. I love little things like 'unless'. I know it's still with us, but still feels a little sad.

I still think Ruby is the more interesting and expressive language. However, for me there's a single pain point that means Python wins in any larger project. That is the behaviour of Python's "import" vs. Ruby's "require". So it's not surprising that this distinction between these languages pops up all over the place. Python tries to be as explicit as possible. While "from import *" is possible it is heavily frowned…

Maybe this experiment of mine is the kind of thing you’d be looking for

https://github.com/lloeki/pak

Re: Show HN: Compile Ruby to C

#30

Post by m12k »

pjmlp wrote: post #27

Nice effort, but I think contributing to Crystal would be better spent.

I maintain a 4 year old rails code base. I'm not going to be porting it to Crystal - but if I had an easy way to get ~5x speedup of the most performance critical parts of my code, I would jump at the opportunity. I'm glad someone is working on this
Post reply on HN