story
Ruby binary trees: 57 seconds Scala binary trees: 11 seconds
[1] - http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/ruby.html [2] - http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/scala.html
string manipulation
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/program.php?tes... memory allocation
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/program.php?tes... I/O
fasta, fasta-redux, reverse-complement write 250MBregex-dna reads 50MB; k-nucleotide, reverse-complement read 250MB
>> …offloaded to native libraries… So the alioth benchmarks are not representative of real-world performance. <<
The benchmarks game does show C programs ;-)
The benchmarks game does show scripting-languages explicitly using native libraries:
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/program.php?tes...
That benchmark performs string manipulations that rarely occur in web apps. Web apps need: concatenation, substring, find/replace, maybe with regexps. All of those are implemented in C.
> memory allocation
Web apps don't tend to implement entire trees in pure Ruby. That benchmark is completely non-representative of real-world performance.
What exactly are you getting at? Of course it's easy to find a bunch of synthetic benchmarks that show weaknesses in particular cases. Still doesn't prove anything.
join and gsub?
http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/program.php?tes...
> Web apps don't tend to implement entire trees in pure Ruby.
Nor do other apps but that is what Hans Boehm came up with as a simple GC benchmark.
http://hboehm.info/gc/gc_bench/
> What exactly are you getting at?
You don't seem to know what is shown on the benchmarks game website.