[kunley]

I wonder why this is downvoted.

Io is beautiful, elegant and slow. The fact that it's slow doesn't mean it's not worth learning or even using in production. Commenter could have put it in other words, well he didn't, but downvoters: you will not change the fact that it's slow by giving -1.

Do we have an era of wishful-thinking driven comment voting?

[bufo]

Depending on what you want to do, Io can be really fast. It has SIMD support built in so for some structures it can be faster than unoptimized C.

[kunley]

That's what I didn't know, relying on my previous encounters and specific tests. Thank you for pointing this!

[draegtun]

And here is a blog post which shows that a 200 times increase in speed is possible when using SIMD: http://www.iolanguage.com/blog/blog.cgi?do=item&id=92

[scythe]

>you will not change the fact that it's slow by giving -1.

...but you can change the fact that it's slow by contributing code to the interpreter! Actor-based concurrency and prototype objects can both be made fast, as has been proven by Erlang and Lua respectively. Exceptions are an unfeature but they can be easily avoided.

The slowness of Io should be seen as a programming challenge, not a problem. ^,~

[stonemetal]

(note: I didn't down vote it.) Io the current implementation is slow but as Ruby, Javascript, and python have shown one slow implementation doesn't make a language slow. From what I understand Io developed by one person in his spare time so enough interest from the community could fix any performance problems.