Speed concerns, rudeness, and narrow-minded excuses

M

Matt Pattison

I've been a little ashamed to be a part of the Ruby community reading
the narrow-minded denials and excuses people have been given when they
voiced their concerns about Ruby's speed. One of the things I've liked
the most about the ruby-talk mailing list over the 5 years I've been a
part of it has been the incredilble politeness and open-mindedness of
its participants, possibly following the great example set by people
such as matz, nobu, Dave Thomas, etc.

Reading respected people in the ruby community such as Austin Ziegler
mouthing off at people's valid speed concerns like he is all-knowing
and they are "full of it", that benchmanks are "crap" or "bullshit",=20
that people who support them are "fools", (quotes from the recent
Python/Ruby benchmark threads) I thought, has the Ruby community
changed now that it's grown in size? You can get this sort of
narrow-minded flame-war mentality any day of the week on Slashdot, but
I can't remember reading this sort of stuff before on ruby-talk from
long term posters, and I'm surprised it hasn't been challenged more
than it has.

I was drawn to the Ruby-talk community half by the fantastic language
which is Ruby, which I found so intuitive and elegant (even if it
always had a few rough edges being actively worked on in terms of
library support, speed, etc.), but equally by the incredibly
open-minded and diverse group which make up the Ruby community, where
people have a wide variety of interesting views I can learn from, but
always tend to resolve their differences in a much more polite and
educated way than any of the other mailing lists I've been a part of.

I would be very disappointed if this politeness and open-mindedness,
which I think is one of the key appeals of the Ruby community, was
lost, due to the vocal efforts of a minority, who try to force their
opinions down everybody else's throats in a rude and closed minded
way. I don't really care whether the Alioth Shootout benchmarks are an
accurate representation of Ruby's performance, whether PostgreSQL is
divine and MySQL is demon spawn, whether FreeBSD or OSX are the only
decent operating systems, whether Emacs is better than Vi(m) ;) What
I care about is whether somebody who has an opinion (which I may well
disagree with), has the right to politely express it, and receive
polite responses in return rather than abuse for holding an
ideologically incorrect opinion.

For this reason I am making a small protest, here at the end of my
email where nobody will probably read it:

"Austin Ziegler does not speak for me"

There, I've said it. And neither does anyone else, regardless of how
respected they may be in the Ruby community, if they dismiss someone's
valid concerns as stupid, or "crap", or "bullshit".

Hoping that the Python/Ruby benchmark threads are an aberration rather
than a shift,

Matt
 
J

James Britt

Matt said:
I've been a little ashamed to be a part of the Ruby community reading
the narrow-minded denials and excuses people have been given when they
voiced their concerns about Ruby's speed. One of the things I've liked
the most about the ruby-talk mailing list over the 5 years I've been a
part of it has been the incredilble politeness and open-mindedness of
its participants, possibly following the great example set by people
such as matz, nobu, Dave Thomas, etc.

Reading respected people in the ruby community such as Austin Ziegler
mouthing off at people's valid speed concerns like he is all-knowing
and they are "full of it", that benchmanks are "crap" or "bullshit",
that people who support them are "fools", (quotes from the recent
Python/Ruby benchmark threads) I thought, has the Ruby community
changed now that it's grown in size? You can get this sort of
narrow-minded flame-war mentality any day of the week on Slashdot, but
I can't remember reading this sort of stuff before on ruby-talk from
long term posters, and I'm surprised it hasn't been challenged more
than it has.

People are people, and even the best will, on occasion, express ideas or
opinions of such a nature, or in such a way, as to surprise and
disappoint. But, this still being a largely good-natured and tolerant
group, such occurrences are understood for what they are: the exception,
not the norm.
I was drawn to the Ruby-talk community half by the fantastic language
which is Ruby, which I found so intuitive and elegant (even if it
always had a few rough edges being actively worked on in terms of
library support, speed, etc.), but equally by the incredibly
open-minded and diverse group which make up the Ruby community, where
people have a wide variety of interesting views I can learn from, but
always tend to resolve their differences in a much more polite and
educated way than any of the other mailing lists I've been a part of.

I believe that is still true, but I'm biased.
I would be very disappointed if this politeness and open-mindedness,
which I think is one of the key appeals of the Ruby community, was
lost, due to the vocal efforts of a minority, who try to force their
opinions down everybody else's throats in a rude and closed minded
way.

This being a text-based medium, I don't really see much *forcing* going
on. People are free to believe what they like, and configure their kill
files as the need.
I don't really care whether the Alioth Shootout benchmarks are an
accurate representation of Ruby's performance, whether PostgreSQL is
divine and MySQL is demon spawn, whether FreeBSD or OSX are the only
decent operating systems, whether Emacs is better than Vi(m) ;) What
I care about is whether somebody who has an opinion (which I may well
disagree with), has the right to politely express it, and receive
polite responses in return rather than abuse for holding an
ideologically incorrect opinion.

Well, politeness is to be desired, but not everyone has the same notions
of exactly what that is, and there may be times when politeness really
isn't the best choice.

I'd be more concerned if abject rudeness was the standard here, but,
really, things are nowhere close to that.
For this reason I am making a small protest, here at the end of my
email where nobody will probably read it:

"Austin Ziegler does not speak for me"

I'm pretty sure Austin speaks only for Austin, and no one is presuming
otherwise. I wouldn't worry about anyone thinking that any one person
on this list is somehow representative of the whole.



James Britt

--

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
 
A

Austin Ziegler

I am mostly addressing James's response, but there are a few things
that I wanted to address in Matt's response.

Matt said:
I've been a little ashamed to be a part of the Ruby community
reading the narrow-minded denials and excuses people have been
given when they voiced their concerns about Ruby's speed. One of
the things I've liked the most about the ruby-talk mailing list
over the 5 years I've been a part of it has been the incredilble
politeness and open-mindedness of its participants, possibly
following the great example set by people such as matz, nobu,
Dave Thomas, etc.
Reading respected people in the ruby community such as Austin
Ziegler mouthing off at people's valid speed concerns like he is
all-knowing and they are "full of it", [...]

At no time have I ever dismissed that there are valid speed concerns
in Ruby. Please reread the thread. I *have* dismissed that the
alioth benchmarks are an accurate measure of Ruby's performance
problems. I know the performance issues in Ruby at least as well as
anyone else with PDF::Writer. I have *seen* how long it takes to do
things that, if I granted myself the luxury of doing some of this in
C, would be much faster than it is. But that would also limit my
distribution and slow down my development.
[...] that benchmanks are "crap" or "bullshit", that people who
support them are "fools", (quotes from the recent Python/Ruby
benchmark threads) [...]

I do hold these opinions and stand by them. I especially hold them
about the alioth benchmarks for a wide variety of reasons; I suspect
Zed Shaw would understand some of those reasons (see his recent
rants on the lack of understanding of statistics by programmers;
most "reliable" benchmarks are designed with statisticians, and I
don't consider most of them reliable in any case). Note -- I'm not
saying that Zed would agree with my stance on benchmarks, but that
he might understand why I am annoyed at the rigorous lack of effort
that the alioth folks put into their shootout.

There are a lot of reasons -- that I've enumerated -- to think that
benchmarks are useless. Also note that I distinguish between
benchmarks and performance measurements and algorithmic analysis
(e.g., big-O notation). Benchmarks are to the latter two as
advertising is to the truth. Advertising sometimes tells the truth
-- but it almost always obscures as much as it reveals.
People are people, and even the best will, on occasion, express
ideas or opinions of such a nature, or in such a way, as to
surprise and disappoint. But, this still being a largely
good-natured and tolerant group, such occurrences are understood
for what they are: the exception, not the norm.

Yes. I have *very* strong opinions on benchmarks. I also have very
strong opinions (and great exhaustion) about the people who come in
-- without fail -- every quarter mouthing off about the alioth
shootout and Ruby's performance. Their problem is that they simply
take the numbers at face value. Alioth's problem is that while they
exert editorial control over the algorithms they choose to highlight
and the implementations they accept, they don't actually bother to
understand the implementations and explain the numbers. They cop out
short of their responsibility of putting up such numbers and claim
that it's the reader's responsibility. So, without fail, we get
people who take the alioth shootout as gospel and don't even have a
clue as to what "acceptable performance" might be. I'm not just
picking on the alioth shootout; before the shootout, it was some
random text processing utility (that often needed a bit of tuning).

Some people want to find fault with Ruby no matter what. It gets
more than just a little tiring.
I believe that is still true, but I'm biased.

I also believe that it's true. But it's also hard to keep one's cool
in the face of determined ignorance. Is that an excuse? Maybe. I
call it a reason, personally, because I've never pretended that I'll
keep my cool when people are -- to my mind's eye, at least --
willfully ignorant, as I believe the people who have been defending
the alioth shootout have been.
This being a text-based medium, I don't really see much *forcing*
going on. People are free to believe what they like, and configure
their kill files as the need.

I do not believe that I am forcing anything. If anything, might I
point out that I was pretty much the *only* person speaking out in
detail in the face of know-it-all self-important ridicule (that's
you, Mr Jenkins). I'm not the only person to have said anything, and
I know that I said it more harshly than others might have, but I
also gave more detail than most others.
Well, politeness is to be desired, but not everyone has the same
notions of exactly what that is, and there may be times when
politeness really isn't the best choice.
=20
I'd be more concerned if abject rudeness was the standard here,
but, really, things are nowhere close to that.

And I would agree. I have been carrying on other discussions without
any of the heat that the alioth shootout has generated. And I *do*
thank Matt for pointing this out. I acknowledge that I have
generated heat in that discussion, and that may have annoyed some
people. I won't apologise for it -- I stand by my words. But I will
be more aware of it in the future. I can't promise to keep my
temper, but I will try to be aware that strident responses to what I
consider to be ignorance is not appreciated by at least some people
on ruby-talk and I will try to moderate it to some degree.
I'm pretty sure Austin speaks only for Austin, and no one is
presuming otherwise. I wouldn't worry about anyone thinking that
any one person on this list is somehow representative of the
whole.

Yes. I do speak only for myself. I'm not even sure that matz would
be bold enough to say that he speaks for the Ruby community. How
matz has been able to keep his cool despite repeated invocations of
the "Principle of Least Surprise" by people who don't even
understand it, I'm not sure. Maybe he's just a better man than I am,
that way.

-austin
--=20
Austin Ziegler * (e-mail address removed)
* Alternate: (e-mail address removed)
 
D

Devin Mullins

Austin said:
I can't promise to keep my
temper, but I will try to be aware that strident responses to what I
consider to be ignorance is not appreciated by at least some people
on ruby-talk and I will try to moderate it to some degree.
Strident responses are also not a very good persuasion tool (and perhaps
I am wrong in assuming persuasion is your goal). I haven't read all of
the performance posts, but of the emails I have read, this was the most
convincing to me, if not the most informative, because, psychologically,
your temperate language made me believe that you weren't the type of
person to try and deceive me.

Devin
 
D

Daniel Amelang

but of the emails I have read, this was the most
convincing to me, if not the most informative, because, psychologically,
your temperate language made me believe that you weren't the type of
person to try and deceive me.

You hit it right on the head. Austin: you are the man. You are even
more so when you can present your arguments in a controlled manner. It
makes your points come across so much more clearly. And you really do
have a lot of great stuff to say.

Dan
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,482
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top