[bayindirh]

> The difference between the shootout microbenchmarks and the TechEmpower benchmarks is that the former test computation-intensive tasks and the latter test an end-to-end web backend example.

That proves my point even further, because I don't develop anything remotely web-related, hence that performance scenario is completely moot for me.

> What's so good about MS ranking in the TechEmpower benchmarks is that it's the fastest full-featured "enterprise" framework.

Again, the same because the software I develop is not "Enterprise" either.

What I develop is scientific software, and needs to be extremely performant. In my case C++ is the best language, but it's not the best for every case. This is why I also learn Go and use Python for other tasks.

In my case, Debian's benchmarks are directly related to my use cases, however even that's not a definitive measurement for my case. It's just a bunch of data to keep in mind.

[hu3]

> That proves my point even further, because I don't develop anything remotely web-related, hence that performance scenario is completely moot for me.

I hope you realize non-web development is a niche nowadays. So it's perfectly reasonable to prioritize .NET benchmarks that target ASP.NET Core web apps/APIs.

[bayindirh]

I hope you realize that web-development in my discipline is a niche nowadays. So, it's perfectly reasonable to prioritize bare metal and micro performance benchmarks that target naked performance, OS and GPU apps/APIs.

Our vantage points are different, and these different vantage points need not to see the complete ecosystem as a whole. It's too big to generalize from a single vantage point, and just because our view reveal us a little of something doesn't mean it is, in fact, little.

There's a whole invisible world out there, from DBs themselves to OS kernels to embedded platforms, and everything in between.

IOW, horses for courses.

[hu3]

And that's fine. Your niche is valid. Just no need to point out that a benchmark targeted at web frameworks focuses on... web use cases.

[toyg]

> I hope you realize non-web development is a niche nowadays.

That's a terrible attitude. If you want a certain ecosystem to get a better rep, you have to be ready to talk with different communities, and accept their feedback.

Python is what it is largely because it can cater to a large number of these very different communities, which has ensured its long-term success. Compare with Ruby, which became effectively a web-only language and has since struggled to go anywhere.

[hu3]

> If you want a certain ecosystem to get a better rep, you have to be ready to talk with different communities, and accept their feedback.

Hard disagree. I prefer specialized tools over jack-of-all-trades. Otherwise we would be coding web applications in assembly.

Your example, Ruby, wouldn't even be a blip in history radar if it wasn't for Ruby on Rails, a specialized and very productive toolkit.

Just because RoR now has more competition doesn't mean it isn't/wasn't awesome.

[toyg]

> Otherwise we would be coding web applications in assembly

Some people write web-apps in C. Just because you don't like something, it doesn't mean the world agrees.

>Ruby, wouldn't even be a blip in history radar if it wasn't for Ruby on Rails

Hard disagree. Ruby was getting traction on its own, as "the purest OOP language you can use in the real world", around the same time Python was starting to get traction (early 2000s). Then RoR blew up, effectively coopting the entire ecosystem. Since then, Python has slowly gone from strength to strength in so many different fields, whereas Ruby died on its ass as soon as people moved on to other tools for web.