问题描述
见过此解释器比较图，我想知道MRI主流用法背后的原因，尽管它表现最差.为什么不是 Kiji 或 Ruby Enterprise Edition 更频繁地使用；缺乏宝石支持或其他东西?
Having seen this interpreter comparison graph, I wondered the reasons behind the MRI's mainstream usage, although it performs the worst. Why aren't Kiji or Ruby Enterprise Edition used more frequently; lack of gem support or something else?
例如，由于其写时复制功能；我想知道是否还有其他解释器可以实现它.
For instance, Ruby Enterprise Edition is chosen by some of the most popular companies, thanks to its copy-on-write feature; I wonder if any other interpreter implements it.
我们改用企业红宝石来获得 的全部利益 [写时复制]内存特征 我们可以绝对确认 某些人节省了30％的内存 报告.这几千 即使在今天， 硬件价格."
"We switched to enterprise ruby to get the full benefit of the [copy-on-write] memory characteristics and we can absolutely confirm the memory savings of 30% some others have reported. This is many thousand dollars of savings even at today’s hardware prices."
推荐答案
MRI是 Matz的Ruby解释器的缩写. Matz是Ruby发明者和主要作者的 Yukihiro Matsumoto 的缩写.这就是为什么它是主要的实现:它是原始的实现，所有其他实现都在以后出现. MRI仍然是参考，所有其他都需要与MRI兼容.但是Matz试图使开发更受规范驱动，而不是由实现驱动的AFAIK.
MRI is short for Matz's Ruby Interpreter. Matz is short for Yukihiro Matsumoto which is the name of the inventor and main author of Ruby. And that's why it is the main implementation: it is the original implementation, all others appeared later. MRI is still the reference, all others need to be compatible with MRI. But Matz tries to make the development more specification-driven instead of implementation-driven, AFAIK.
这篇关于为什么MRI是最主流的Ruby解释器，而它却表现最差?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持！