Lua vs Ruby benchmarks (similarly "high-level" languages, insanely different performance)

Re:Lua vs Ruby benchmarks (similarly "high-level" languages,... by brianm on Friday January 30, 2009 @04:17PM (#458705)

Personally, I would hav just done Lua vs Ruby instead of LuaJIT vs Ruby.

Results look almost the same ;-)

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/benchmark.php?test=all...

Lua is generally the fastest scripty language, ruby is generally the slowest. Ruby is much more general purpose though -- Lua is very optimized for embedding.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lua vs Ruby benchmarks (similarly "high-level" languages,... by palish on Friday January 30, 2009 @04:25PM (#458717)

LuaJIT makes the Lua mandelbrot program run 95 times faster than Ruby's, whereas the stock Lua interpreter is only 17 times faster.

Better yet, LuaJIT is a drop-in replacement. There's no reason not to use it, as far as I know.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lua vs Ruby benchmarks (similarly "high-level" languages,... by LogicHoleFlaw on Friday January 30, 2009 @04:31PM (#458734)

Well, LuaJIT only runs on x86, and only in 32-bit mode. Though, the work-in-progress LuaJIT 2 is supposed to be easily portable to ARM or other architectures.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lua vs Ruby benchmarks (similarly "high-level" languages,... by brianm on Friday January 30, 2009 @04:31PM (#458736)

I love the "only 17 times faster" bit ;-)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Lua vs Ruby benchmarks (similarly "high-level" languages,... by lliiffee on Friday January 30, 2009 @05:54PM (#458868)

Try comparing ruby to c++!

[ Parent | on HN ]