Native gem roundup!

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 2, 2009.

  1. I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using. In
    general it seems like most native extensions fall into two categories:

    * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick, nokogiri
    * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons

    And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    categories.

    Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more of
    them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm concerned
    about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9 and JRuby do
    almost as much to speed Ruby up.

    Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions for
    things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the future
    for both the standard and alternative implementations.

    So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    why do they exist?

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 2, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Roger Pack Guest


    > So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    > why do they exist?


    I use mysql, mysqlplus, eventmachine, ruby debug, hitimes, win32-api,
    ruby prof, mongrel, and ferret. Most wrappers to C libs [which is for
    speed].
    Cheers!
    -=r
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
     
    Roger Pack, Feb 2, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Coey Minear Guest

    Charles Oliver Nutter writes:
    > I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using. In
    > general it seems like most native extensions fall into two categories:
    >
    > * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick, nokogiri
    > * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    > algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons
    >
    > And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    > categories.
    >
    > Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more of
    > them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm concerned
    > about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9 and JRuby do
    > almost as much to speed Ruby up.
    >
    > Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions for
    > things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the future
    > for both the standard and alternative implementations.
    >
    > So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    > why do they exist?
    >
    > - Charlie
    >


    For me, they would be FastCGI and ruby-postgres, two more examples of
    wrapping a C library. (Technically, I currently run FastCGI as
    installed --- in 'site_ruby' --- rather than a gem; there was always a
    hiccup if I tried to install it as a gem, so I went with the quickest
    way to get it working.)

    As you may guess, this is a Rails application. FastCGI is used for
    Apache deployment; ruby-postgres is for accessing the PostgreSQL
    database. I know there are other options for Apache/web deployment
    (e.g. Mongrel), but this install is stable and other priorities take
    precedence over investigating alternative deployment configurations.
    For PostgreSQL, even if I moved to ruby-pg, that is still a C library
    wrapper.

    Anyways, just trying to answer your query.


    --
    Coey Minear
     
    Coey Minear, Feb 2, 2009
    #3
  4. Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
    > I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using. In
    > general it seems like most native extensions fall into two categories:
    >
    > * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick,
    > nokogiri
    > * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    > algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons


    * They interact directly with the Ruby interpreter (e.g. rcov,
    ruby-debug)

    Here's the set on my home machine:

    $ cd /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/; find . -name '*.so'
    /json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/parser/parser.so
    /json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/generator/generator.so
    /json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/parser.so
    /json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/generator.so
    /fastthread-1.0.1/ext/fastthread/fastthread.so
    /fastthread-1.0.1/lib/fastthread.so
    /rcov-0.8.1.2.0/lib/rcovrt.so
    /rcov-0.8.1.2.0/ext/rcovrt/rcovrt.so
    /linecache-0.43/ext/trace_nums.so
    /linecache-0.43/lib/trace_nums.so
    /mongrel-1.1.5/ext/http11/http11.so
    /mongrel-1.1.5/lib/http11.so
    /sqlite3-ruby-1.2.4/ext/sqlite3_api/sqlite3_api.so
    /sqlite3-ruby-1.2.4/lib/sqlite3_api.so
    /ruby-debug-base-0.10.3/ext/win32/ruby_debug.so
    /ruby-debug-base-0.10.3/ext/ruby_debug.so
    /ruby-debug-base-0.10.3/lib/ruby_debug.so
    /ruby-gpgme-1.0.3/lib/gpgme_n.so
    /ruby-gpgme-1.0.3/gpgme_n.so

    On another machine I also have termios, rubywmq, ruby-postgres,
    sys-filesystem, RedCloth
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
     
    Brian Candler, Feb 2, 2009
    #4
  5. > I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using. In
    > general it seems like most native extensions fall into two categories:
    >
    > * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick, nokogiri
    > * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    > algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons
    >
    > And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    > categories.
    >
    > Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more of
    > them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm concerned
    > about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9 and JRuby do
    > almost as much to speed Ruby up.
    >
    > Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions for
    > things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the future
    > for both the standard and alternative implementations.
    >
    > So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    > why do they exist?
    >
    > - Charlie


    I use RUDL or Rubygame (SDL wrappers) to make games;
    ruby-prof for profiling of these games, because pure Ruby profiler from the standard library slows programs too much down.

    Jakub

    --
    "Configure complete, now type 'make' and PRAY."

    (configure script of zsnes - www.zsnes.com)
     
    Jakub Pavlík jn., Feb 2, 2009
    #5
  6. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Ryan Davis Guest

    On Feb 2, 2009, at 07:15 , Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

    > * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick,
    > nokogiri
    > * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a
    > particular algorithm in a native language or call a library for the
    > same reasons


    or they're written to get into ruby internals... I don't quite
    consider that a wrapper around C API and it looks like you don't either.
     
    Ryan Davis, Feb 2, 2009
    #6
  7. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Tom Cloyd Guest

    Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
    > I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using. In
    > general it seems like most native extensions fall into two categories:
    >
    > * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick, nokogiri
    > * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    > algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons
    >
    > And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    > categories.
    >
    > Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more
    > of them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm
    > concerned about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9 and
    > JRuby do almost as much to speed Ruby up.
    >
    > Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions
    > for things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the
    > future for both the standard and alternative implementations.
    >
    > So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    > why do they exist?
    >
    > - Charlie
    >
    >

    Charlie,

    As someone with a social survey research background, I want to advise
    you that this is an extremely poor way to get your question answered. If
    you're not serious about getting a good answer, your request is very
    close to list-noise. If you are, then you need a decent sample OR all
    the parametric data (i.e., don't sample it - get it all).

    I wonder why you don't go after the latter? Is there someway to get
    download counts for various gems? I realize there are hundreds, but THAT
    would be useful data.

    Alternatively, you could use the gems themselves as your population.
    Draw a sample of them, as samples of serious Ruby code (and get at least
    35, and preferably much more than that), then scrape from them the gems
    THEY use, and get a frequency distribution from that sample.

    In terms of bang for buck, I'd go with the latter alternative, 'cause
    THAT data would actually be something from which you might reasonably
    infer something.

    What you're doing with this list-post nonsense is akin to putting a box
    of surveys on the sidewalk, with a sign "please fill one out", then
    taking your results and thinking they actually MEAN something. Believe
    me, they do not.

    Hope this helps the "cause".

    t.

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC - Private practice Psychotherapist
    Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
    << >> (email)
    << TomCloyd.com >> (website)
    << sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental health weblog)
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    Tom Cloyd, Feb 2, 2009
    #7
  8. Tom Cloyd wrote:
    > Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
    >> I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using.
    >> In general it seems like most native extensions fall into two
    >> categories:
    >>
    >> * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick,
    >> nokogiri
    >> * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    >> algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons
    >>
    >> And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    >> categories.
    >>
    >> Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more
    >> of them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm
    >> concerned about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9
    >> and JRuby do almost as much to speed Ruby up.
    >>
    >> Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions
    >> for things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the
    >> future for both the standard and alternative implementations.
    >>
    >> So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    >> why do they exist?
    >>
    >> - Charlie
    >>
    >>

    > Charlie,
    >
    > As someone with a social survey research background, I want to advise
    > you that this is an extremely poor way to get your question answered.
    > If you're not serious about getting a good answer, your request is
    > very close to list-noise. If you are, then you need a decent sample OR
    > all the parametric data (i.e., don't sample it - get it all).
    >
    > I wonder why you don't go after the latter? Is there someway to get
    > download counts for various gems? I realize there are hundreds, but
    > THAT would be useful data.
    >
    > Alternatively, you could use the gems themselves as your population.
    > Draw a sample of them, as samples of serious Ruby code (and get at
    > least 35, and preferably much more than that), then scrape from them
    > the gems THEY use, and get a frequency distribution from that sample.
    >
    > In terms of bang for buck, I'd go with the latter alternative, 'cause
    > THAT data would actually be something from which you might reasonably
    > infer something.
    >
    > What you're doing with this list-post nonsense is akin to putting a
    > box of surveys on the sidewalk, with a sign "please fill one out",
    > then taking your results and thinking they actually MEAN something.
    > Believe me, they do not.
    >
    > Hope this helps the "cause".
    >
    > t.
    >



    There is always this:

    http://gems.rubyforge.org/stats.html

    -Justin
     
    Justin Collins, Feb 2, 2009
    #8
  9. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Jos Backus Guest

    strongtyping, used by html-table. I sent the author a patch that makes it work
    with 1.8.6 and 1.9.1 but haven't heard back.

    --
    Jos Backus
    jos at catnook.com
     
    Jos Backus, Feb 3, 2009
    #9
  10. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Tom Cloyd Guest

    Justin Collins wrote:
    > Tom Cloyd wrote:
    >> Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
    >>> I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using.
    >>> In general it seems like most native extensions fall into two
    >>> categories:
    >>>
    >>> * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick,
    >>> nokogiri
    >>> * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a
    >>> particular algorithm in a native language or call a library for the
    >>> same reasons
    >>>
    >>> And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    >>> categories.
    >>>
    >>> Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more
    >>> of them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm
    >>> concerned about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9
    >>> and JRuby do almost as much to speed Ruby up.
    >>>
    >>> Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions
    >>> for things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the
    >>> future for both the standard and alternative implementations.
    >>>
    >>> So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them
    >>> or why do they exist?
    >>>
    >>> - Charlie
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Charlie,
    >>
    >> As someone with a social survey research background, I want to advise
    >> you that this is an extremely poor way to get your question answered.
    >> If you're not serious about getting a good answer, your request is
    >> very close to list-noise. If you are, then you need a decent sample
    >> OR all the parametric data (i.e., don't sample it - get it all).
    >>
    >> I wonder why you don't go after the latter? Is there someway to get
    >> download counts for various gems? I realize there are hundreds, but
    >> THAT would be useful data.
    >>
    >> Alternatively, you could use the gems themselves as your population.
    >> Draw a sample of them, as samples of serious Ruby code (and get at
    >> least 35, and preferably much more than that), then scrape from them
    >> the gems THEY use, and get a frequency distribution from that sample.
    >>
    >> In terms of bang for buck, I'd go with the latter alternative, 'cause
    >> THAT data would actually be something from which you might reasonably
    >> infer something.
    >>
    >> What you're doing with this list-post nonsense is akin to putting a
    >> box of surveys on the sidewalk, with a sign "please fill one out",
    >> then taking your results and thinking they actually MEAN something.
    >> Believe me, they do not.
    >>
    >> Hope this helps the "cause".
    >>
    >> t.
    >>

    >
    >
    > There is always this:
    >
    > http://gems.rubyforge.org/stats.html
    >
    > -Justin
    >
    >

    Now, THAT's outright cheating. Worse yet, you probably Googled to find
    this (or could have, if you didn't know about it). What is this world
    coming too?

    t.

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC - Private practice Psychotherapist
    Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
    << >> (email)
    << TomCloyd.com >> (website)
    << sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental health weblog)
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     
    Tom Cloyd, Feb 3, 2009
    #10
  11. Tom Cloyd wrote:
    > As someone with a social survey research background, I want to advise
    > you that this is an extremely poor way to get your question answered. If
    > you're not serious about getting a good answer, your request is very
    > close to list-noise. If you are, then you need a decent sample OR all
    > the parametric data (i.e., don't sample it - get it all).


    I disagree. I think the people most likely to respond to a mailing-list
    request are the exact people I'm looking to reach. Did it occur to you
    that perhaps I know there are download stats for all gems that I could
    mine? I'm looking to gauge the importance of gems to vocal mailing-list
    participants directly, by posting a general message here and seeing who
    responds. And I've gotten a lot of great responses, both on-list and
    off. If I wanted an accurate count of gem downloads (no doubt inflated
    by older gems including dev-time libraries as runtime dependencies) I
    certainly could get that. But people coming out and saying "I really
    need X" is far more interesting.

    So please, others, feel free to reply with what X you find important.

    And Tom, thanks for your input. What native extensions do you find useful?

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #11
  12. Roger Pack wrote:
    >> So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    >> why do they exist?

    >
    > I use mysql, mysqlplus, eventmachine, ruby debug, hitimes, win32-api,
    > ruby prof, mongrel, and ferret. Most wrappers to C libs [which is for
    > speed].
    > Cheers!


    Thanks for the response!

    Is that the win32 that ships with MRI or something else? I don't use MRI
    much, so I'm not familiar with that library.

    eventmachine and mongrel..I assume we're talking about evented mongrel?

    ruby_debug and ruby_prof...I see ruby_prof coming up a lot. I think
    we'll simply need to provide something similar out of the box for JRuby.
    Hmmm.

    One last question....why mysql or mysqlplus gems instead of the "nice"
    DB wrapper libraries like Sequel, DataMapper, and so on?

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #12
  13. Coey Minear wrote:
    > As you may guess, this is a Rails application. FastCGI is used for
    > Apache deployment; ruby-postgres is for accessing the PostgreSQL
    > database. I know there are other options for Apache/web deployment
    > (e.g. Mongrel), but this install is stable and other priorities take
    > precedence over investigating alternative deployment configurations.
    > For PostgreSQL, even if I moved to ruby-pg, that is still a C library
    > wrapper.
    >
    > Anyways, just trying to answer your query.


    Cool, thanks. Are you using ruby-postgres through ActiveRecord itself or
    standalone in some way

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #13
  14. Brian Candler wrote:
    >> * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick,
    >> nokogiri
    >> * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    >> algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons

    >
    > * They interact directly with the Ruby interpreter (e.g. rcov,
    > ruby-debug)


    Damn good point...you totally trumped me there. So there's three cases,
    with this new one perhaps being truly the most impl-specific case.

    > Here's the set on my home machine:
    >
    > $ cd /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/; find . -name '*.so'
    > ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/parser/parser.so
    > ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/generator/generator.so
    > ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/parser.so
    > ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/generator.so


    Do people generally use the native json gem for performance reasons?
    Does a pure-ruby version not cut it? Are there benchmarks?

    > ./fastthread-1.0.1/ext/fastthread/fastthread.so
    > ./fastthread-1.0.1/lib/fastthread.so


    Ok, not needed under JRuby, recent Ruby 1.8.6 or 1.8.7+.

    > ./rcov-0.8.1.2.0/lib/rcovrt.so
    > ./rcov-0.8.1.2.0/ext/rcovrt/rcovrt.so


    Tooling...blasted tooling. JVM has so much good tooling, if I could only
    harness it well for Ruby stuff.

    > ./linecache-0.43/ext/trace_nums.so
    > ./linecache-0.43/lib/trace_nums.so
    > ./mongrel-1.1.5/ext/http11/http11.so
    > ./mongrel-1.1.5/lib/http11.so
    > ./sqlite3-ruby-1.2.4/ext/sqlite3_api/sqlite3_api.so
    > ./sqlite3-ruby-1.2.4/lib/sqlite3_api.so
    > ./ruby-debug-base-0.10.3/ext/win32/ruby_debug.so
    > ./ruby-debug-base-0.10.3/ext/ruby_debug.so
    > ./ruby-debug-base-0.10.3/lib/ruby_debug.so
    > ./ruby-gpgme-1.0.3/lib/gpgme_n.so
    > ./ruby-gpgme-1.0.3/gpgme_n.so
    >
    > On another machine I also have termios, rubywmq, ruby-postgres,
    > sys-filesystem, RedCloth


    Thanks for the response. Obviously I'm interested because of JRuby, and
    I think most of these have equivalents already, but there are obviously
    gaps. I think dev-time tooling may actually be where we're weakest at
    the moment, which is ironic given the history of JVM/Java-based tooling.

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #14
  15. Jakub Pavlík jn. wrote:
    >> I'm curious what native gems/extensions people are typically using. In
    >> general it seems like most native extensions fall into two categories:
    >>
    >> * They are wrappers around a C API/library, as in zlib, rmagick, nokogiri
    >> * They are written for performance reasons, to implement a particular
    >> algorithm in a native language or call a library for the same reasons
    >>
    >> And there's a lot of grey area, with some extensions falling in both
    >> categories.
    >>
    >> Wrappers can now largely be handled by FFI, and I hope more and more of
    >> them will use FFI as needed to access those libraries. But I'm concerned
    >> about extensions written for performance, since Ruby 1.9 and JRuby do
    >> almost as much to speed Ruby up.
    >>
    >> Ultimately, my quest is to eliminate Ruby's dependence on extensions for
    >> things FFI or "faster Ruby" could do, since it will improve the future
    >> for both the standard and alternative implementations.
    >>
    >> So, what native gems or extensions do you use? Why do you use them or
    >> why do they exist?
    >>
    >> - Charlie

    >
    > I use RUDL or Rubygame (SDL wrappers) to make games;
    > ruby-prof for profiling of these games, because pure Ruby profiler from the standard library slows programs too much down.


    I think someone was working on SDL over FFI recently, but I don't
    remember who and I don't remember how far they got. I'd love to see it
    myself.

    ruby-prof...noted. Seems like an essential tool for most folks, we'll
    just have to provide something.

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #15
  16. Ryan Davis wrote:
    > or they're written to get into ruby internals... I don't quite consider
    > that a wrapper around C API and it looks like you don't either.


    Yeah, that's definitely a third category I totally missed. It's an
    unusual one, though, since it doesn't necessarily have to be "native"
    (it could be in Ruby in Rubinius, or Java in JRuby...)

    And my failure to recognize it could be why we don't have a ruby-prof
    for JRuby yet. Definitely noted.

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #16
  17. Jos Backus wrote:
    > strongtyping, used by html-table. I sent the author a patch that makes it work
    > with 1.8.6 and 1.9.1 but haven't heard back.


    I was unaware of strongtyping...very glad you brought it to my
    attention. So many projects, so little time...but this warrants some time.

    Thank you!

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #17
  18. Charles Oliver Nutter

    Ryan Davis Guest

    On Feb 3, 2009, at 01:24 , Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:

    > Ryan Davis wrote:
    >> or they're written to get into ruby internals... I don't quite
    >> consider that a wrapper around C API and it looks like you don't
    >> either.

    >
    > Yeah, that's definitely a third category I totally missed. It's an
    > unusual one, though, since it doesn't necessarily have to be
    > "native" (it could be in Ruby in Rubinius, or Java in JRuby...)


    Yeah. just depends on the impl's API into itself. ParseTree simply
    isn't necessary on rubinius.
     
    Ryan Davis, Feb 3, 2009
    #18
  19. Ryan Davis wrote:
    > Yeah. just depends on the impl's API into itself. ParseTree simply isn't
    > necessary on rubinius.


    I'm still interested in producing a PT-compatible sexp from JRuby's AST,
    but it becomes harder the more we customize that AST (and the more we
    pre-compile code and dump the memory-expensive AST).

    The other stuff, though, we definitely need. Profiling, debugging
    (including into Java code, if necessary), code coverage. It's
    "interesting" to be reinventing all these tools again atop the JVM, but
    it's also frustrating that they weren't created language-agnostic by JVM
    advocates in the beginning.

    Myopic idiots.

    - Charlie
     
    Charles Oliver Nutter, Feb 3, 2009
    #19
  20. >> $ cd /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/; find . -name '*.so'
    >> ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/parser/parser.so
    >> ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/generator/generator.so
    >> ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/parser.so
    >> ./json-1.1.3/ext/json/ext/generator.so

    >
    > Do people generally use the native json gem for performance reasons?
    > Does a pure-ruby version not cut it? Are there benchmarks?


    I only use it by default, because there are other gems which have
    dependencies on "json" rather than "json_pure". e.g.

    $ gem dependency couchrest
    Gem couchrest-0.12.4
    json (>= 1.1.2, runtime)
    rest-client (>= 0.5, runtime)
    mime-types (>= 1.15, runtime)

    Regards,

    Brian.
    --
    Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
     
    Brian Candler, Feb 3, 2009
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Richard Jones
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    538
    Richard Jones
    Mar 14, 2009
  2. Jonathan Métillon
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    149
    Jonathan Métillon
    Nov 11, 2006
  3. jyzhang
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    140
    jyzhang
    Dec 1, 2006
  4. Austin 7873
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    216
    Eric Hodel
    Jan 27, 2007
  5. David Southwell
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    161
    Eric Hodel
    Aug 11, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page