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

Ruby 3.3

ruby-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 277 posts

Re: Ruby 3.3

#81

Post by ric2b »

pdimitar wrote: post #49
Alifatisk wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seriously don’t think it’s worth comparing Ruby to languages like C++ and the rest. One is scripting language, the other compiled, the difference is huge already there.

> I seriously don’t think it’s worth comparing Ruby to languages like C++ and the rest. It is worth comparing any two languages and ecosystems if they are used for the same things, in this case -- web backends. Anything and everything that has a web backend is a fair game for comparison.

Building a web backend with C++ is a very dangerous and complex ordeal, you're extremely likely to expose memory based vulnerabilities to the entire world.

Re: Ruby 3.3

#82

Post by nerdponx »

burlesona wrote: post #75
999900000999 wrote: post #57

Worth it to learn Ruby if you already know Python and NodeJS ? I find Ruby fascinating yet difficult.

Ruby is basically a less popular but more elegant Python. It’s a solid general purpose language, but especially good at shell scripting, data munging, etc. If you’re fluent in Node and Python it should be quite easy to learn. The downside is it’s not going to do anything fundamentally new for you coming from those languages. The upside is mostly aesthetic, Ruby offers and encourages really beautiful ways of expressin…

Having tried to use Ruby for text processing specifically, I'm not sure I agree it beats Python at that particular task. Maybe I'm just used to the Python way of doing things, but I found it difficult to work with the lack of first-class functions and iterators/generators, as well as the general iteration protocol.

Re: Ruby 3.3

#83

Post by nerdponx »

ckolkey wrote: post #16
hetman wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, only because it's possible to learn to live with doesn't make it pleasant. Especially for managing large projects it can get unwieldy. Most high level languages I can think of have moved away from this approach. I used to be a huge Ruby fan but having exposure to Python where this isn't an issue, life is just easier.

To each their own, I guess. After working with python/lua, I really appreciate not needing to do manual imports all over. I'm glad ruby makes this so easy :) Oh, and not needing __init__.py files in order to import something. Goodness, what an absolute pain.

I really like the Python/Lua module system. To each their own...

Re: Ruby 3.3

#84

Post by pdimitar »

ric2b wrote: post #81
pdimitar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I seriously don’t think it’s worth comparing Ruby to languages like C++ and the rest. It is worth comparing any two languages and ecosystems if they are used for the same things, in this case -- web backends. Anything and everything that has a web backend is a fair game for comparison.

Building a web backend with C++ is a very dangerous and complex ordeal, you're extremely likely to expose memory based vulnerabilities to the entire world.

I agree but people are doing it anyway. So technically Ruby on Rails and C++ are competitors in the web backend space.

Re: Ruby 3.3

#85

Post by pvg »

rfoo wrote: post #37
ksec wrote: post #2

I think Ruby 3.3 is perhaps one of the most important and feature rich Ruby release in the past 10 years. I never thought Ruby would have a shipping and production ready JIT before Python. And Prism, Lrama, IRB. A lot of these were discussed in previous HN submissions. But one thing that is not mentioned or discussed enough, is Ractor, M:N thread scheduler, Fibre and Async. Especially in the context of Rails. I am wo…

> I never thought Ruby would have a shipping and production ready JIT before Python. This is entirely predictable - Ruby does not have a big scientific computing community which happened to depend on every implementation detail of the hosting interpreter.

There's a talk from a couple of years ago by one of the YJIT developers that discusses this in some detail and it's more interesting/complicated than that. The whole thing is worth checking out but the specific section starts here

https://youtu.be/vucLAqv7qpc?t=937

Re: Ruby 3.3

#87

Post by [deleted] »

Alifatisk wrote: post #28
IshKebab wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> double digit performance improvements You mean like 10% faster, or 10x faster? Edit: clicked the link; it's 10%. I don't think that's going to make any difference to the perception of Ruby's slowness given that it's on the order of 50-200x slower than "fast" languages like Rust, Java, Go and C++.

I seriously don’t think it’s worth comparing Ruby to languages like C++ and the rest. One is scripting language, the other compiled, the difference is huge already there.

[deleted]

Re: Ruby 3.3

#88

Post by aantix »

tomlin wrote: post #78
IshKebab wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> double digit performance improvements You mean like 10% faster, or 10x faster? Edit: clicked the link; it's 10%. I don't think that's going to make any difference to the perception of Ruby's slowness given that it's on the order of 50-200x slower than "fast" languages like Rust, Java, Go and C++.

I'm so glad that you said this and weren't downvoted into the ground. Honestly, Ruby needs to die. It performs like a go cart in a Formula 1 race. I'm actually just exhausted watching smart people tell me this is a language and toolchain worth dedicating brain cells to.

Ruby and Python are the only two ecosystems that seem to prioritize developer happiness. They're a pleasure to work with. So they're not going to die anytime soon.

Re: Ruby 3.3

#89

Post by jupp0r »

ric2b wrote: post #81
pdimitar wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I seriously don’t think it’s worth comparing Ruby to languages like C++ and the rest. It is worth comparing any two languages and ecosystems if they are used for the same things, in this case -- web backends. Anything and everything that has a web backend is a fair game for comparison.

Building a web backend with C++ is a very dangerous and complex ordeal, you're extremely likely to expose memory based vulnerabilities to the entire world.

Google, Facebook, Amazon and Twitter beg to differ (not completely C++, but for services where it makes sense). Also nginx, passenger and other parts of your Ruby app.

Re: Ruby 3.3

#90

Post by xivusr »

999900000999 wrote: post #57

Worth it to learn Ruby if you already know Python and NodeJS ? I find Ruby fascinating yet difficult.

I’d genuinely love to hear more about what you find difficult about Ruby coming from a heavier Python or NodeJS background.

For me, coming from more of a Ruby background, I found Python and Node to not be too hard to understand, and my only nitpick would be on how eggs/packages were managed and dealing with dependancies.

In particular, Python dependancies compared to Ruby dependancies were more challenging initially for me. I’ve grown to appreciate Python indents and find it nice to read, but that was also annoying at first.

Post reply on HN