[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ruby-core
Subject:    [ruby-core:20337] Re: Behavior: autoload calls rb_require() directly
From:       Neil Stevens <neil () hakubi ! us>
Date:       2008-12-04 23:13:22
Message-ID: 493863E4.803 () hakubi ! us
[Download RAW message or body]


Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
> daz wrote:
>> Sorry, that's wrong.
>>
>> Like Pit just suggested elsewhere in this thread, we can't override to
>> log (a, :plus, b) then a._oldplus_(b).
>>
>> The design is short-circuited ... *not* optimized.
>>
>> A language designer shouldn't test her abilities to second guess what
>> the user is likely to want or need to do. It's a lost cause. :)
> 
> I wasn't speaking as a language designer or an implementer; I was
> speaking as someone who'd like to be able to get C-like performance out
> of numeric operations in Ruby some day. Yes, it's still possible. But so
> is draining the ocean with an eyedropper.

Yup.  Using the wrong tool for a job is usually inefficient.

There are already languages out there that sacrifice flexibility in
order to give efficiency for niche tasks.  I don't understand why Ruby
should start to become one of them.
-- 
Neil Stevens - neil@hakubi.us

If you're seeing shades of gray, it's because you're not
looking close enough to see the black and white dots.


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]