A Comparison of Python and Ruby Extension Interfaces (Re: Comparison between Python and "Ruby")

Yukihiro Matsumoto matz at netlab.co.jp
Thu Nov 4 03:20:43 CET 1999


Fernando Pereira <pereira at research.att.com> writes:

|> * Since Ruby has mark-and-sweep garbage collection, there
|> is no manipulation of reference counts. There weren't
|> actually any examples of this in the Python dbm module,
|> though.
|What's the effect of this on portability? For instance, how are
|pointers to live objects from the C stack handled? As is well-known,
|this cannot be done portably.

See Greg Ewing's article at <38215CE7.70C3D560 at compaq.com>.
In summary, Ruby is fairly portable, but if your first
priority is the portability, Python wins.

						matz.




More information about the Python-list mailing list