The Artima Developer Community
Sponsored Link

Ruby Buzz Forum
Denver/Boulder RUG presentation

0 replies on 1 page.

Welcome Guest
  Sign In

Go back to the topic listing  Back to Topic List Click to reply to this topic  Reply to this Topic Click to search messages in this forum  Search Forum Click for a threaded view of the topic  Threaded View   
Previous Topic   Next Topic
Flat View: This topic has 0 replies on 1 page
Daniel Berger

Posts: 1383
Nickname: djberg96
Registered: Sep, 2004

Daniel Berger is a Ruby Programmer who also dabbles in C and Perl
Denver/Boulder RUG presentation Posted: Jun 20, 2008 9:39 PM
Reply to this message Reply

This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Ruby Buzz by Daniel Berger.
Original Post: Denver/Boulder RUG presentation
Feed Title: Testing 1,2,3...
Feed URL: http://djberg96.livejournal.com/data/rss
Feed Description: A blog on Ruby and other stuff.
Latest Ruby Buzz Posts
Latest Ruby Buzz Posts by Daniel Berger
Latest Posts From Testing 1,2,3...

Advertisement
A couple nights ago I gave my presentation on Sapphire. It seemed to go over well. No one threw food at me at least. I don't know that I'll post the slides, so let me summarize:

  • MRI is badly managed
  • MRI source code is sloppy

    • Redundant code indicates that zero refactoring has been done.
    • No comments on internal functions.
    • No style standards (hard to read).

  • MRI is badly tested

    • Less than 1500 core tests.
    • Some patches break other things that would be caught by tests.

  • MRI has lots of bugs
  • MRI has lots of warnings

    • Warnings are not bugs, but usually indicate a problem of intent.

  • MRI treats MS Windows as a second class citizen

    • Solaris, AIX and HP-UX, too.
    • Laziness or apathy, not the difficulty of the Windows API.

  • MRI core developers often ignore patches

    • Probably because the test bed stinks.
    • NIH and Eastern/Western cultural issues are probably contributors, too.

  • MRI is stagnating from an evolutionary point of view. Other languages are evolving.

    • Fortress
    • Erlang
    • Perl 6
    • Python 3000

  • Faster is good, but speed != evolution

    • Much more effort could have been put into making 1.8.x faster.
    • If speed isn't usually the bottleneck, why obsess over speed?

    Ruby 1.9


    - Is not what I want

    • Driven by cabal of core developers, not end users


    Other implementations: JRuby, IronRuby, Rubinius, Maglev, MacRuby are all:



    • Bound to a particular platform or...
    • Bound to a particular toolchain or...
    • Bound by MRI spec


    Means they cannot evolve past MRI without breaking spec.


    • Evolve or die!


    Sapphire:



    • Is not bound by the MRI spec.
    • Is not bound by Rails.
    • Will have a good test suite.

      • I currently have about 3000 core tests (9000 assertions) currently.
      • More being added.

    • Will pick and choose the best of the nuggets from other languages (plus my own)

      • Method annotations
      • Structured warnings
      • Type inferencing
      • The list goes on ... see the wiki for more details.

Read: Denver/Boulder RUG presentation

Topic: Conversations vs. Laws Previous Topic   Next Topic Topic: RubyConf 2007

Sponsored Links



Google
  Web Artima.com   

Copyright © 1996-2019 Artima, Inc. All Rights Reserved. - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use