On Aug 11, 2009, at 6:21 AM, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: >> Also, I looked into django, the framework for python. I was sorta >> intrigued by python because that's what google uses and I believe >> yahoo as well. However, there is 0.00% chance of my little ol' web >> app ever reaching their seismic proportions, but from what I've read >> django is quite comparable to ruby and quite a bit faster. > > No. Django is comparable to *Rails*. Python is comparable to Ruby. > > I've never heard the claim that Django is faster than Rails. Your > source?
Python is faster than Ruby, it has a faster GC and generically a faster interpreter. There's no need of any source for such claim, it's basically 8 or 9 years that the Python interpreter produces bytecode while the MRI builds a syntax tree and evaluates it. This is also the reason why YARV is going to be 3x faster than the actual implementation. That's the theory, and of course nobody cares because on the web before looking at the speed of the interpreter we should look at real bottlenecks, namely the network and the database (I have here a case where db writes are almost the same number of db reads - this is performance wise what I call a "pain in the ass", and ruby is definitely not a part of it). Of course having a faster interpreter is going to be sweet, but it's not something to worry about. Ruby is "fast enough" for 99% of cases. ngw --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
