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

Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

docs.topazruby.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 190 posts

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#121

Post by ErikRogneby »

raphael_kimmig wrote: post #103
Pewpewarrows wrote: post #10

Completely unscientific, but if these outputs are any indication, this is going to be great news for Rubby users in the future... $ time ruby -e "puts 'hello world'" hello world real 0m0.184s user 0m0.079s sys 0m0.092s $ time ~/Downloads/topaz/bin/topaz -e "puts 'hello world'" hello world real 0m0.007s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s

There is a neural net example benchmark in the topaz git repo. Don't know how representative that example is, but at least startup time shouldn't be dominating the results... $ ruby -v ruby 1.9.3p194 (2012-04-20 revision 35410) [x86_64-darwin11.3.0] $ ruby bench_neural_net.rb ruby bench_neural_net.rb 17,74s user 0,02s system 99% cpu 17,771 total $ bin/topaz bench_neural_net.rb bin/topaz bench_neural_net.rb 3,43s user…

should be able to run any number of ruby examples from here: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u32/ruby.php

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#122

Post by callum85 »

Cowen wrote: post #67
Pewpewarrows wrote: post #10

Completely unscientific, but if these outputs are any indication, this is going to be great news for Rubby users in the future... $ time ruby -e "puts 'hello world'" hello world real 0m0.184s user 0m0.079s sys 0m0.092s $ time ~/Downloads/topaz/bin/topaz -e "puts 'hello world'" hello world real 0m0.007s user 0m0.002s sys 0m0.004s

Whenever I see frontpages for these kinds of projects like "a faster X" or "X written in Blub", the first thing I want to see on the frontpage is how this new project compares to X in terms of quality and performance. Even specious benchmarks would help more than zero benchmarks. I wish more frontpages for these kinds of projects would do that.

"Even specious benchmarks would help more than zero benchmarks."

I disagree. Zero benchmarks is definitely better than specious benchmarks.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#123

Post by fleitz »

nirvdrum wrote: post #119
fleitz wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much does one EC2 server net you in revenue? What is the percentage increase in profitability yielded from these optimizations? What was the percentage increase in profitability yielded from the last A/B test of your homepage CTA copy?

An EC2 server doesn't net me anything in revenue. It costs us money and falls into the category of expenses. Reducing expenses makes us more profitable. Reducing our expenses by 50% made us roughly 50% more profitable. Better than that, this savings isn't one-time. It's recurring, as EC2 is recurring. But we've also reduced the expense growth curve (the savings wasn't linear), so we can continue to add customers for…

I find it interesting that reducing your EC2 usage by 50% decreased your expenses by 50%, it means one of two things, you aren't paying your employees and don't have any overhead, or the cost of EC2 dwarfs the cost of your employees and overhead.

If it's the latter, I'd seriously consider colo as you can probably reduce costs by another 80%.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#124

Post by tonycoco »

I mean, it's cool that people want to expose Python's version of Rubinius as a building block to yet another Ruby interpeter, but, come on. Why is this a thing?! Why not waste time improving the JVM, contributing to Rubinius, patch the MRI, or a million other open source projects already tackling Ruby being "slow". By the way, has anyone else realized that, while Ruby is slow, computers are getting faster for us too!

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#125

Post by thegrubbsian »

This is the most ridiculous thing I've seen in a while. You know what nobody ever asked for? Answer: Ruby running on Python. The only advantage I see here is being able to access some of the Python scientific and mathematical libraries but at that point just freaking use Python. Perhaps this time would have been better spent improving MRI or even JRuby or porting the desired Python libs to Ruby.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#126

Post by stcredzero »

ephemeralgomi wrote: post #65
stcredzero wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the lack of many core features probably helps out a lot atm. I don't understand why the lack of features would affect the time of "hello world."

Loading the standard library takes time. With a smaller (underimplemented) standard library, you can get to the user's code much more quickly.

Perl 5 had an in-memory footprint of about 768k. VisualWorks Smalltalk had a standard one of 12MB, yet loaded and started it faster than Perl did with 768k. If just your standard library takes very long at all to load, something needs attention.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#127

Post by nirvdrum »

fleitz wrote: post #123
nirvdrum wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An EC2 server doesn't net me anything in revenue. It costs us money and falls into the category of expenses. Reducing expenses makes us more profitable. Reducing our expenses by 50% made us roughly 50% more profitable. Better than that, this savings isn't one-time. It's recurring, as EC2 is recurring. But we've also reduced the expense growth curve (the savings wasn't linear), so we can continue to add customers for…

I find it interesting that reducing your EC2 usage by 50% decreased your expenses by 50%, it means one of two things, you aren't paying your employees and don't have any overhead, or the cost of EC2 dwarfs the cost of your employees and overhead. If it's the latter, I'd seriously consider colo as you can probably reduce costs by another 80%.

Obviously the discussion was scoped around non-personnel expenses. I'm not going to dump an entire P&L here. And this is now wildly off-tangent.

I was illustrating that there is real world gain to be had by doing something as simple as switching to a new Ruby or spending some time with a profiler. These weren't drastic code rewrites. They didn't require layers of caching or sharding of my database. I fail to see what's even contentious about this.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#128

Post by stcredzero »

thegrubbsian wrote: post #125

This is the most ridiculous thing I've seen in a while. You know what nobody ever asked for? Answer: Ruby running on Python. The only advantage I see here is being able to access some of the Python scientific and mathematical libraries but at that point just freaking use Python. Perhaps this time would have been better spent improving MRI or even JRuby or porting the desired Python libs to Ruby.

> Ruby running on Python

That isn't what it is. Either you don't have the technical chops to understand, or you didn't read, or both.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#129

Post by fuzzyman »

thegrubbsian wrote: post #125

This is the most ridiculous thing I've seen in a while. You know what nobody ever asked for? Answer: Ruby running on Python. The only advantage I see here is being able to access some of the Python scientific and mathematical libraries but at that point just freaking use Python. Perhaps this time would have been better spent improving MRI or even JRuby or porting the desired Python libs to Ruby.

It's Ruby in RPython, the implementation language of the PyPy VM toolchain. It has nothing to do with integrating with Python. It's an alternative Ruby VM using a proven JIT generator technology that happens to be built with a Python-like language. Hope that helps.

Re: Announcing Topaz: A New Ruby

#130

Post by semanticart »

vidarh wrote: post #114
semanticart wrote: post #107

I'm probably in the minority but I would love to see a dialect of ruby that has significant whitespace. Death to unnecessary 'end's

Significant whitespace in Python was a significant factor in my decision to get proficient in Ruby over Python. Yes, I hate it that much, and I know quite a few Ruby devs with similar views...

Here's how I look at it: I indent my code properly and my team does the same. If we're already doing the right thing where whitespace is concerned, why not reap some benefits from it?

Of course, I also use Coffeescript and Haml...

Post reply on HN