As of Ruby 1.9, I would dispute the "Ruby is slower than everything" case. There's lots of evidence to the contrary, e.g. http://www.unlimitednovelty.com/2012/06/ruby-is-faster-than-python-php-and-perl.html Jason -----Original Message----- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marc Chantreux Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 11:25 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Python and Ruby On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:25:14AM -0500, Matthew Sherman wrote: > Ok folks, we have veered into nonconstructive territory. How about we > come back to the original question and help this person figure out > what they need to about Ruby and Python so they can do well with what > they want to work on. comparing languages on objective criterias (especially when they are as close as ruby and python) isn't constructive. but ok, let's try * both claim to be very easy to learn (ruby by having a very nice syntax, python by limitating the features from the syntax) * writing python code is very boring when you come from featured. langages like ruby or perl. nothing can be expressed a simple way. * ruby is slow ... i mean: even for a dynamic language. * both langages have libs for libraries for libraries but lack something as robust and usefull as CPAN (and related tools) * python has an equivalent of the perl PDL (scipy) * python has Natural Language Toolkit (equivalent in other langages ?) your basic goal | your langage ------------------------------------- write/maintain faster | perl reuse existing faster | python learn faster | ruby execute faster | you're probably screwed. experiment lua, go, haskell, rust regards -- Marc Chantreux Université de Strasbourg, Direction Informatique 14 Rue René Descartes, 67084 STRASBOURG CEDEX ☎: 03.68.85.57.40 http://unistra.fr "Don't believe everything you read on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln