# For performance, write it in C **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [July 26, 2006, 10:50am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952 "2006-07-26T10:50:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 10:38am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/121 "2006-07-28T10:38:37Z")
Tim B. wrote: > So, first gripe: C is faster than Ruby _in certain problem domains_. > In others, it’s not. The post was about people wanting better performance for their code. Quite clearly if the code you have written in Ruby (or whatever) runs fast enough for you then performance is a non issue. If however the performance of your code is an issue then in truth there is only so much improvement that you can squeeze out of Ruby, if that is enough to resolve your performance issues then fine. If you want still more performance then you want to write it in C (or perhaps buy some new hardware 🙂 ) > Second gripe. The notion of doing a wholesale rewrite in C is almost > certainly wrong. > An earlier project of mine used GD from Ruby to calculate some colour > metrics from images and write them into a database. I rewrote the whole > thing in C, using the same GD and SQLite2 libraries as the Ruby version, > and the improvement was massive. Despite the fact that the Ruby was not > actually doing very much. Most of the time was spent in the GD library, > so I am not all that convinced that rewritting part of a project in C > will achieve quite the same improvement. And if you are going to convert > a significant chunk of code to C then you may as well go the whole hog. > In fact, the notion of doing any kind of serious hacking, without > doing some measuring first, is almost always wrong. The _right_ way > to build software that performs well is to write a natural, idiomatic > implementation, trying to avoid stupid design errors but not worrying > too much about performance. If it’s fast enough, you’re done. > No problem here. > If it’s not fast enough, don’t write another line of code till you’ve > used used a profiler and understand what the problem is. If in fact > this is the kind of a problem where C is going to do better, chances > are you only have to replace 10% of your code to get 90% of the > available speedup. > Not been my experience to date but then perhaps I am not working on > problems that can be solved in that way. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 12:14pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/122 "2006-07-28T12:14:42Z")
Well, you need the compiler chain if you want to compile, that is what inline does. On windows, you have three options: - MS - you can get by with their free compiler (VS Express or something) - cygwin - mingw I have full VS, and inline worked for me when I started the program with proper environment (=proper paths set), although I’ve tried only the examples. And it seems VC6 and VC7 (VS2003) are better to use due to the manifest stuff that VC8 (VS2005) creates. I haven’t tried cygwin or mingw. J. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 11:53am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/123 "2006-07-28T11:53:04Z")
On 2006-07-26, Kristof B. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > – extend takes a list of columns, and extends each column with a > where x free > > latin\_square n = latin\_square\_ n > where latin\_square\_ 0 = replicate n [] – initalize columns to nil > latin\_square\_ m | m \> 0 = extend (latin\_square\_ (m-1)) n > > square2str s = unlines $ map format\_col s > where format\_col col = unwords $ map show col > > main = mapIO\_ (putStrLn . square2str) (findall (\s → s =:= latin\_square 5)) > ------------------------- end latin.curry ----------------------------- It’s really nice and compact! AFAIK Curry is Haskell boosted with logic programming. I – who, ATM, just watches these languages from a distance, and can’t tell it by looking at the code – wonder if have you used here something specific to Curry, which would be harder/uglier to express in Haskell? And how the Curry compiler looks like? Is it just a hacked GHC? How Curry performance relates to that of Haskell? Regards, Csaba ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 12:51pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/124 "2006-07-28T12:51:40Z")
On 7/27/06, Isaac G. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > JIT is the key to a lot of that. Performance depends greatly on > > the compiler, the JVM, the algorithm, etc. > I won a bet once from a friend. We wrote comparable programs in > > > Java and C++ (some arbitrary math in a loop running a bazillion > > times). > > > > With defaults on both compiles, the Java was actually _faster_ > > than the C++. Even I didn’t expect that. But as I said, this > > sort of thing is highly dependent on many different factors. Yes I believe that on some theoretic base under some circumstances JIT will outclass a static compiler simply because it is able to optimize using Runtime Information. I would be surprised however, to have consistent better performance in JIT than in precompiled code in the near future - (ha near future can be defined to my needs, so I am never wrong 😉 - let’s say 0.01 ky. Would you mind sharing these examples, maybe offlist I suggest as we are loosing the red gem here. Thx a lot in advance Robert > – Deux choses sont infinies : l’univers et la bêtise humaine ; en ce qui concerne l’univers, je n’en ai pas acquis la certitude absolue. - Albert Einstein ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 12:42pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/125 "2006-07-28T12:42:15Z")
Kristof B. wrote: > – extend takes a list of columns, and extends each column with a > where x free > > latin\_square n = latin\_square\_ n > where latin\_square\_ 0 = replicate n [] – initalize columns to nil > latin\_square\_ m | m \> 0 = extend (latin\_square\_ (m-1)) n > > square2str s = unlines $ map format\_col s > where format\_col col = unwords $ map show col > > main = mapIO\_ (putStrLn . square2str) (findall (\s -\> s =:= latin\_square 5)) > ------------------------- end latin.curry ----------------------------- I don’t see where elems\_diff is used after it is defined. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 3:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/126 "2006-07-28T15:30:00Z")
Pit C. wrote: > Maybe I should have written that giving that I’m using the One Click > Installer, don’t have the Windows compiler toolchain, and am not > willing to use cygwin, I can’t use Ruby Inline. Is this better? > Speaking of CygWin, a couple of people here have expressed what seems > like disdain for it. I am constrained to use a Windows desktop at my day > job, and CygWin has been an important factor in my retaining my sanity > about the fact. I don’t use the server pieces of CygWin. My preference > (in open source tools) is first native Windows, second CygWin and third > (Gentoo) Linux. I was dual booted with Gentoo for a while until the > VMware Server beta started. That became a viable option so that’s how I > exercise the third option now. So what is the source of the reluctance to use CygWin in the Ruby community? ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 3:06pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/127 "2006-07-28T15:06:42Z")
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 03:39:09 -0700, William J. wrote: > > – same position > > | x =:= upto n & > > > > main = mapIO\_ (putStrLn . square2str) (findall (\s -\> s =:= latin\_square 5)) > > ------------------------- end latin.curry ----------------------------- > > I don’t see where elems\_diff is used after it is defined. Heh, you are right! I defined it, and then when I didn’t need it I forgot to remove it. Thanks for noting, Kristof ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 3:33pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/128 "2006-07-28T15:33:46Z")
On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 09:45:01 +0000, Csaba H. wrote: > > ``` > > (x `elem` col) =:= False = (x:col) : addnum cs (x:prev) > > > > ``` > > > > ------------------------- end latin.curry ----------------------------- > > It’s really nice and compact! > AFAIK Curry is Haskell boosted with logic programming. Yes, exactly! > I – who, ATM, just watches these languages from a distance, and can’t > tell it by looking at the code – wonder if have you used here > something specific to Curry, which would be harder/uglier to express in > Haskell? Yes, the =:= operator unifies terms like in logic languages, and curry makes it possible to write nondeterministic functions. For example the upto function I defined above can evaluate to any number from 1 upto n, while in haskell it could have only one result. In the code that I wrote above: upto n | n \> 1 = n ? upto (n-1) is the same as upto n | n \> 1 = n upto n | n \> 1 = upto (n-1) Then there are search functions that make it possible to extract all outcomes from a nondeterministic function in a lazy way (i.e. findall) In haskell the above would probably be written in a monad that expresses nondeterminism, but I doubt it will be as clear as the Curry code. > And how the Curry compiler looks like? Is it just a hacked GHC? How > Curry performance relates to that of Haskell? As far as I know the Curry compiler I used (Munster CC) is written from scratch, in Haskell. I doubt it is as fast and optimized as the Haskell compiler, since Haskell has a much large userbase. > Regards, > Csaba Regards, Kristof ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 10:36pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/129 "2006-07-28T22:36:27Z")
On Thursday 27 July 2006 10:13, Ashley M. wrote: > > Good luck. I recently got a Ruby program that aggregates several LDAP > > directory-pulls with about a million entries down from a few hours to a > > few seconds, without having to drop into C. It can be done, and it’s > > kindof fun too. > > Next time I get a morning free I might apply some of the tweaks that have > been suggested.  Might be interested to see how much  I can improve the > performance. I looked at the source of the script today, and I made these changes: - use FasterCSV instead of CSV - don’t buffer every row in the datasets, send them straight to Zlib:GzipWriter as they are processed - don’t do hash lookups in the middle of a 15 million row loop, do them once in advance! Unfortunately I’m still stuck with a nasty “rows.each { |row| row.each { |col| col.strip! } }” type section, to fix the poor quality of the data, which would take a lot of time going through all the fields to thin out. Despite this, I’ve got the run time down from over 2.5 hours to about 50 minutes. The smaller files are individually about 6x faster, but I’m happy with 3x faster overall. It means we can realistically run it in the day if there are issues. One curious thing is that while the real time was about 50 mins, the user time was only about 30 mins (negligible sys time if I remember). Not sure where the other 20 mins has gone? Ashley ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 10:40pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/130 "2006-07-28T22:40:20Z")
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 02:42:30PM +0900, Chad P. wrote: > > performance characteristics that _can_ be divorced from Excel (because > > they’re Window’s own performance characteristic, not Excel’s). Argue > > those points, and you’re arguing about the wrong software. > > Design decisions that involve interfacing with interface software that > sucks is related to the software under discussion – and not all of the > interface is entirely delegated to Windows, either. No software can be > evaluated for its performance characteristics separate from its > environment except insofar as it runs without that environment. Here’s all I’m saying: the environment is important, but it’s a variable that must be cancelled when talking about some piece of software that’s running on top of it. You can only make judgements about the speed of something like Excel by comparing it to another spreadsheet with a similar set of features running on Windows. Otherwise, you’re only making guesses as to where the sluggishness and bloat lie. > > But Wine is an emulator, and while it does a good job approaching the > > speed of Windows, it doesn’t hit it, nor can it hit it. You’re not > > comparing like with like. Now that’s far from sporting. > > Actually, no, it’s not an emulator. Yes, it is. It’s a set of libraries and executables that emulate a Windows environment. > It’s a set of libraries (or a > single library – I’m a little sketchy on the details) that provides the > same API as Windows software finds in a Windows environment. An > emulator actually creates a faux/copy version of the environment it’s > emulating. Which both Wine and Cygwin do. To quote the Wikipedia article on emulators: ``` A software emulator allows computer programs to run on a platform (computer architecture and/or operating system) other than the one ``` for which they were originally written. Linux compatibility on FreeBSD is a software emulator that fools Linux executables into thinking they’re running on Linux. Because of the commonalities between FreeBSD and Linux, this emulation layer can be thin. > It is to Linux compared with Unix as an actual emulator is > to Cygwin compared with Unix: one is a differing implementation and the > other is an emulator. ? > . . . and, in fact, there are things that run faster via Wine on Linux > than natively on Windows. Not surprising, really. > [snip] > > > under FreeBSD. Bringing Wine in is a red herring. Software cannot be > > blamed for the environment it’s executed in. > > I didn’t bring it up. You did. I made a comment about Excel not > working in Linux as a bit of a joke, attempting to make the point that > saying Excel performance can be evaluated separately from its dependence > on Windows doesn’t strike me as useful. See above. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 11:10pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/131 "2006-07-28T23:10:49Z")
Again, I haven’t seen your code or your data, but 50 minutes still seems like a frightfully long time for such minimal processing on only 15 million rows. If I were you, I’d keep optimizing (but then I’m pretty obsessive about optimizing). Exactly how much time does GzipWriter take, for example? Several people have correctly said that you stop optimizing when your program is “fast enough” (which is a business decision, not a technical one), but optimizing strictly inside of Ruby is a lot cheaper than optimizing by dropping into C (which I do often enough), because you don’t incur the portability and other costs everyone has been talking about. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/132 "2006-07-29T00:03:07Z")
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 05:26:26AM +0900, Keith G. wrote: > being “less than sporting”. But if you want to act like that, there’s > not much I can do to stop you. That wasn’t a passive-aggressive remark, it was a joking comment about the inequity of your comparison (intentional or otherwise). You’re welcome to your misconceptions and bad attitudes, though. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2006, 10:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/133 "2006-07-28T22:30:17Z")
On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 04:34:19PM +0900, Chad P. wrote: > Gee willickers, I’m sorry I didn’t use the exact phrasing you wanted me > to. Maybe next time, though, you won’t claim the bits I said that > didn’t actually have anything to do with your actual complaint were > wrong. > > Y’know, screw it. Be an ass if you like. I’m done with this subthread. I was being polite until you made a passive agressive remark about me being “less than sporting”. But if you want to act like that, there’s not much I can do to stop you. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:16am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/134 "2006-07-29T00:16:14Z")
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 06:59:41AM +0900, Chad P. wrote: > > I was being polite until you made a passive agressive remark about me > > being “less than sporting”. But if you want to act like that, there’s > > not much I can do to stop you. > > That wasn’t a passive-aggressive remark, it was a joking comment about > the inequity of your comparison (intentional or otherwise). It didn’t come across as joking. > You’re welcome to your misconceptions and bad attitudes, though. Ditto. I wan’t the one who wrote “Y’know, screw it. Be an ass if you like.” I hadn’t even considered flipping the bozo bit until I read that. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:16am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/135 "2006-07-29T00:16:24Z")
Ashley M. wrote: > > \> One curious thing is that while the real time was about 50 mins, the user time \> was only about 30 mins (negligible sys time if I remember). Not sure where \> the other 20 mins has gone? \> \> Ashley \> Disk I/O? Maybe? -Justin ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:19am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/136 "2006-07-29T00:19:37Z")
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 07:12:09AM +0900, Bill K. wrote: > GENTLEMEN! YOU CAN’T FIGHT IN HERE, THIS IS THE WAR ROOM !!! And I was just about to put my mexican wrestling mask on. Sigh. 😉 K. ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:12am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/137 "2006-07-29T00:12:53Z")
From: “Chad P.” [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > > I was being polite until you made a passive agressive remark about me > > being “less than sporting”. But if you want to act like that, there’s > > not much I can do to stop you. > > That wasn’t a passive-aggressive remark, it was a joking comment about > the inequity of your comparison (intentional or otherwise). You’re > welcome to your misconceptions and bad attitudes, though. GENTLEMEN! YOU CAN’T FIGHT IN HERE, THIS IS THE WAR ROOM !!! ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:32am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/138 "2006-07-29T00:32:52Z")
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 05:37:24AM +0900, Keith G. wrote: > running on top of it. You can only make judgements about the speed of > something like Excel by comparing it to another spreadsheet with a > similar set of features running on Windows. Otherwise, you’re only > making guesses as to where the sluggishness and bloat lie. What’s important is how two pieces of software run in the same environment, not whether the environment is the reason a given application is slow at some things. That was my point: the GUI performance of Excel is, indeed, relevant to a discussion of Excel performance, despite the fact that significant chunks of Excel’s GUI is implemented by way of the environment. Compare it with another spreadsheet running in the same environment, and don’t cancel some of its slowness by blaming it on Windows. > > Actually, no, it’s not an emulator. > > Yes, it is. It’s a set of libraries and executables that emulate a > Windows environment. No, it’s not. Repeat after me: “WINE Is Not an Emulator”. That’s not just an affectation. It is a statement of fact about WINE. That’s why they call it WINE. An Windows emulator would be a “fake Windows” running in Linux, like a VM: WINE is basically just an API that happens to be as close to the Windows API (in all useful ways) as the WINE developers can get it. It does not pretend to be a Windows machine. It just provides compatibility for Windows programs on Linux. Perhaps you aren’t aware that WINE stands for WINE Is Not an Emulator, or that they aren’t lying whey they say that. > > It is to Linux compared with Unix as an actual emulator is > > to Cygwin compared with Unix: one is a differing implementation and the > > other is an emulator. > > ? (where ~ means “roughly equivalent to”) Differing implementations: Wine ~ Windows Linux ~ Unix Emulators: Emulator != Original Cygwin != Linux ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 12:33am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/139 "2006-07-29T00:33:04Z")
On Jul 28, 2006, at 3:33 PM, Ashley M. wrote: > I looked at the source of the script today, and I made these changes: > > - use FasterCSV instead of CSV Fair warning, I’m coming into this conversation late and I haven’t read all that came before this. However, if you are using FasterCSV… > Unfortunately I’m still stuck with a nasty “rows.each { |row| > row.each { |col| > col.strip! } }” type section, to fix the poor quality of the data, > which > would take a lot of time going through all the fields to thin out. FasterCS can convert fields as they are read. I’m not sure if this will be faster, but it may be worth a shot. See the :converters argument to FasterCSV:🆕 [http://fastercsv.rubyforge.org/](http://fastercsv.rubyforge.org/) James Edward G. II ---
**Author:** ![tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/t/90ced4/32.png) [@tekhne](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/tekhne)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2006, 1:16am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952/140 "2006-07-29T01:16:11Z")
Peter H. schrieb: > Whenever the question of performance comes up with scripting languages > such as Ruby, Perl or Python there will be people whose response can be > summarised as “Write it in C”. I am one such person. Some people take > offence at this and label us trolls or heretics of the true programming > language (take your pick). > > I am assuming here that when people talk about performance they really > mean speed. Some will disagree but this is what I am talking about. write in VHDL (or Verilog or SystemC), synthesize you piece of hardware, plugin into PCI, have fun with most performant (in terms of speed)and efficient (in terms of energy consumption) solution 🙂 […] > So what am I recommending here, write all your programs in C? No. Write > all your programs in Perl? No. Write them in your favourite scripting > language to refine the code and then translate it into C if the > performance falls short of your requirements. Even if you intend to > write it in C all along hacking the code in Perl first allows you to > play with the algorithm without having to worry about memory allocation > and other such C style house keeping. Good code is good code in any > language. I like C, but in this context C can be replaced with any compiled language. > If you really really want that performance boost then take the following > advice very seriously - “Write it in C”. from my point of view C has the only advantage of running on nearly every platform. As I said above any of compiled languages would speed up the code. my 2 cents Regards, Daniel [Previous page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952.md?page=6) [Next page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/for-performance-write-it-in-c/99952.md?page=8)