"Lisp isn't quite as dynamic as Ruby"
?! Please substantiate. And of course when I say "Lisp" I really mean "Common Lisp".
?! Please substantiate. And of course when I say "Lisp" I really mean "Common Lisp".
I'm guessing; I have no numbers on how it compares to actual Java.
http://tinyurl.com/daom93 - shootout numbers rhino v. java
I was under the impression that Rhino was doing some compiling to byte-code (unlike what MRI does, but what perhaps like JRuby does).
Live and learn.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=545859 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=545851
Wow; who knew?
For whatever it's worth, I think the problem Javascript is going to have with speed is that it is so dynamic that it makes it difficult for compilers to optimize. If it ever got type hints it would probably be much easier to make fast.
The semantics of javascript are so different to Java (javascript functions are not like java functions everything is dynamic etc.) that you can't really expect the performance of javascript code to be comparable to Java just because it's hosted on the JVM, even if it did compile to Java byte code.
The Javascript equivalent would have to do so much more work than the Java version to support all the crazy crap you can do in javascript (ad hoc adding of properties to almost any object at any time).