I do get your reference. I was a java developer since 1996. 2000 was 13 years ago and ruby is far older than Java was then, so hardly a valid comparison.
Almost the same # years experience here in Java, then in Ruby for the last several.
Ruby is NOT dog slow compared in duration of time per activity on the (virtual) hardware we have now than Java was in the early 2000s on the hardware in those days.
Java is slower than writing machine code, but that doesn't mean I'm going to start coding in machine code.
If Ruby is dog slow for you, you are probably trying to run JRuby in development (vs. on server) which is dog slow (though on server after startup and compilation it is pretty darn fast), or you're starting Rails up everytime you need to do anything (vs. the many ways around that).
If you've read JRuby is faster- they are talking about the server. They didn't mean locally, recompiling all of the time.
It's true Ruby is older, but Ruby is usable today. I'm sorry that you had a bad experience but please don't spread FUD.
Ruby is NOT dog slow compared in duration of time per activity on the (virtual) hardware we have now than Java was in the early 2000s on the hardware in those days.
Java is slower than writing machine code, but that doesn't mean I'm going to start coding in machine code.
If Ruby is dog slow for you, you are probably trying to run JRuby in development (vs. on server) which is dog slow (though on server after startup and compilation it is pretty darn fast), or you're starting Rails up everytime you need to do anything (vs. the many ways around that).
If you've read JRuby is faster- they are talking about the server. They didn't mean locally, recompiling all of the time.
It's true Ruby is older, but Ruby is usable today. I'm sorry that you had a bad experience but please don't spread FUD.