On Tue, 23 May 2006 20:29:56 +0100 Craig Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I looked at Ruby about a year ago and dismissed it then because of > speed. I thought that the overhead of instantiating an object in an > interpreted language was the problem. Being interpreted is certainly part of the problem. Quickly compiled languages like python, perl and pike are significantly faster, while still being very dynamic and flexible. > At least Java/JSP is partly pre-compiled and has the advantage of strong > data typing. Also, when you declare a final class & use static methods, > the speed increase is noticable - at the cost of extensibility. Ruby is strongly typed too. Do you mean statically typed? If you want static typing in a dynamic (scripting) language, use pike. Its weakly typed though unfortunately. Adam
