HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
codicoscepticos
ruby-implementations
OPEN SOURCE2013–2024
codicoscepticos / ruby-implementations

ruby-implementations

List of Ruby implementations.

Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
7Distinct people
7Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
114GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

List of Ruby implementations.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 11:56:56 AM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year7 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2013-09-16 14:09:16 UTC to 2024-12-31 12:03:10 UTC.

012013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20132014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2024

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

7 sources
psychoslave·Jan 17, 2023
I see the point to make a parallel with HipHop, but here YJIT is directly integrated in CRuby, the main implementation of the language, and it’s just a matter of command line flag whether you enable or disable it — at least from what I remember that I red. From what I remember, HipHop was distributed in a different toolchain than the vanilla PHP interpreter. Ruby also have other interpreters available by the way: https://github.com/codicoscepticos/ruby-implementations
In Ruby 3.2’s YJIT is Production-Ready
hardwaregeek·Aug 4, 2019
Hey, I didn't mean to dismiss your work. MRI is frankly a lot of complicated, at times archaic C and I'd certainly take a nice pile of Rust instead :D. I'm mostly just concerned because as far as I know there's maybe 3-4 implementations of Ruby that are actively developed and a whole lot more abandoned ones ^[1]. Have you considered taking some of the pieces of Artichoke and finding a way to incorporate them into MRI? ^[1] https://github.com/codicoscepticos/ruby-implementations
In Artichoke – A Ruby made with Rust
ppseafield·Jun 1, 2018
For Rust and Go, they're very new languages, so multiple implementations are going to be hard to come by. Although there is gccgo. Some of those you listed though have a lot of different implementations. Ruby has the Ruby MRI, JRuby, among others. [0] Additionally it spawned a lot of Ruby-like languages on different platforms. Python has the standard Python (Pick 2 or 3), PyPy, MicroPython, unladen_swallow, Stackless Python, IronPython, Jython, among others [1]. PHP has had the reference implementation, Zend Engine, HipHop and HHVM (Both from Facebook), among others [2]. As another comment mentioned, Javascript has V8, SpiderMonkey, Chakra, and JavascriptCore, all with their own quirks. [3] [0] https://github.com/cogitator/ruby-implementations/wiki/List-... [1] https://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonImplementations [2] https://en.wikipedia.or
Read the rest
g/wiki/PHP#Implementations [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript_engine#JavaScript_e...
In When an implementation monoculture might be the right thing
mythz·Sep 7, 2014
> This is exactly where it becomes an issue. You get to a situation where apps running on Chrome are faster, and the other browsers are slower. So? JavaScript apps already run faster with in Browsers with faster JS VMs or for different users on faster hardware and different devices e.g. Smart Phones vs iPads vs TVs vs Desktops. Safari in iOS had a much faster JS implementation than Android or even the WebView in iOS apps, this doesn't make slower devices useless or stop users from viewing websites in different apps than Safari or even stop other browser vendors from developing alternative browsers for iOS. Having a faster implementation doesn't make every other device or browser useless. > Why would anyone run a slower JS implementation of an app, when Chrome gives them wings? Why should the web be shackled to the limitations of JavaScri
Read the rest
pt? This same reasoning could apply when V8 was first released which was 100x faster than other JS engines at the time. This just made every browser vendor care deeply and invest more in JavaScript performance. This is the same as impl-driven defacto standards like Canvas and WebGL, new experiences open up more categories and encourage other vendors to follow suit - A rising tide lifts all boats. The core Dart Team is driven by trying to improve the web as best they can, just as they've done with V8 they want all their work to be freely used and used to encourage new innovations on the web. > A large body of source code isn't as adoptable as you imagine. You need the people who are embedded in the evolution of the platform, or you are always going to lag. Not true. A valid implementation of a language spec precisely means that source code in that language can be run on any implementation, just like existing Java code could run on Android's Dalvik and ART VMs. When a language has a specification it makes it easier to create different implementations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Java_virtual_machines). It's also possible when a language doesn't have a specification as seen with Ruby VMs (https://github.com/cogitator/ruby-implementations/wiki/List-...) but it's much easier to implement when there's an unambiguous spec to follow. Also because Dart (like V8_ is both open source and embeddable, no-one needs to reimplement it, they can embed it as-is or port it. > You need the people who are embedded in the evolution of the platform, or you are always going to lag. The developers of Node, didn't have to work on V8 team to embed V8, neither does anything else that embeds, compiles or ports V8. > Not true. As an example, for a long time Mono's GC was much slower than .Net's. You're contradicting yourself and disproving your own point. A GC is not in the language specification, it's an implementation detail which the Mono team had to re-implement themselves precisely because it wasn't Open Source. None of this applies with the Dart platform or team whom are developing a truly open platform and embeddable VM who are actively encouraging other users and vendors to adopt. > The lessons from the 90s and early 2000's were very clear. We need to learn from them. It seems at least they're not as clear to you - none of your comparisons are valid, nor have you cited the ones that were.
In Why Google thinks you should drop everything you do and pick up Dart
vidarh·Sep 16, 2013
First of all "Ruby" is not an implementation. The performance differences between MRI and the different patched versions of it, MacRuby, MagLev, jRuby, Rubinius etc. can be substantial. [edit: I referenced https://github.com/cogitator/ruby-implementations/wiki/List-... here, but then I read through the rest of the list, and too much of it is "junk", so I added the list of the more mature implementations above instead] But the point is not that making speed improvements is impossible. I strongly believe Ruby can be made as fast as current JS implementation or better. But there's a vast gap between being able to, and for performance numbers based on 45% of RubySpec to mean anything about what we can expect to see in terms of performance of this particular implementation. I'm working on a Ruby compiler myself (woefully incomplete; certainly
Read the rest
vastly faster than MRI on the tiny subset it can compile, but pointless to benchmark for exactly the reasons I stated: I have no way of telling how much performance it'll lose to deal with method invalidation etc.), and I absolutely love that more people try to implement Ruby and it'd be fantastic if these performance gains stay as they flesh it out. As someone else pointed out: Several Ruby implementation started out with impressive numbers on some subset of the language. Then they slowed down more and more as code was added to handle the corner cases of the language. Maybe these guys will do better. Maybe they won't. The current benchmark does not tell us either way.
In Ruby 2.1 Garbage Collection to Address Criticism on Large Scale Deployments

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.