Ruby On Rails Showdown with Java Spring/Hibernate 555
Paradox writes "Java developer Justin Gehtland recently tried re-implementing one of his web applications in Ruby on Rails instead of his normal Java Spring/Hibernate setup. His analysis of overall performance and application size was startling, to say the least. The Java app's configuration alone was nearly the size of the entire Rails codebase, and Rails application was significantly (15%-30%) faster! At the same time, the Ruby community is abuzz because Ruby is getting a new optimized bytecode compiler for its upcoming 2.0 release. Will Ruby on Rails become even faster as a result?"
Faster? (Score:5, Funny)
I would assume so, doesn't optimized usually mean faster?
Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)
doesn't optimized usually mean faster?
I'd give you an answer, but I haven't been able to fully test out my optimized Gentoo box yet -- it's still compiling.
Re:Here we go again (Score:5, Funny)
Just watch, it's impossible to have an intelligent discussion between the two groups.
Is that so, Mr. Poopyhead?
Not fast enough for Slashdot... (Score:4, Funny)
Ruby on rails performance (Score:2, Funny)
Beating Java's performance and garrulous xml-based configuration is like shooting dead fish in a barrel.
First Post! (Score:5, Funny)
--
Posted Via JFPB - Java First Post Bot
Re:any comparison like this... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Ruby on rails performance (Score:2, Funny)
Re:any comparison like this... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Faster? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Application (Score:5, Funny)
Yes there is. Writing shakespeare. Just add more monkeys and more typewriters.
Re:looks interesting, but does it have to be ruby? (Score:1, Funny)
Wup! Lisp has been mentioned. Let the Giant My Meta Features Can Beat Up Your Meta Features fights begin.....
Re:Faster? (Score:4, Funny)
>Ruby has one other massive advantage over Java on the medium-term horizon: Parrot.
You're just repeating what they told you, aren't you?
hawk