> If you want fast Ruby it seems Crystal is your only option.
Crystal may be fast, but its definitely bot Ruby. Choices for fast not-Ruby are not lacking.
> Why are we surprised when attempts to shoe-horn it into something else (Ruby 3.0, JRuby, Truffle Ruby) fall flat?
Weird that you don’t put Ruby 1.9+ on that list, though that is as much or more a switch from what immediately preceded it with parallelism as an improvement area as 3.0 is (sure, Ractors are a bigger language change, but going from green threads to native threads with a VM lock was a major implementation change.) The difference is that 3.0’s relevant improvements are still experimental and its easier to misrepresent “haven’t yet stabilized and seen wide production use” as “fell flat” than it would be to claim thr same thing about 1.9’s improvements. But its not true in either case.
Crystal may be fast, but its definitely bot Ruby. Choices for fast not-Ruby are not lacking.
> Why are we surprised when attempts to shoe-horn it into something else (Ruby 3.0, JRuby, Truffle Ruby) fall flat?
Weird that you don’t put Ruby 1.9+ on that list, though that is as much or more a switch from what immediately preceded it with parallelism as an improvement area as 3.0 is (sure, Ractors are a bigger language change, but going from green threads to native threads with a VM lock was a major implementation change.) The difference is that 3.0’s relevant improvements are still experimental and its easier to misrepresent “haven’t yet stabilized and seen wide production use” as “fell flat” than it would be to claim thr same thing about 1.9’s improvements. But its not true in either case.