Digg

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

PHP vs Java vs Ruby

cmswire.com — Tim Bray outlines the basic advantages of each of these three platforms (or rather the two languages and one framework if you are scoring at home).

Bury

japonia18 1 year 308 days ago, made popular 1 year 307 days ago

1031 diggs
digg it

96 Comments
Who Dugg It?

quine, on 10/12/2007, -3/+27"Tim’s metrics don’t really exist on a quantitative level nor are they based on any published statistics — just a very informed intellect and a privileged position."

...So? Basically this guy is talking out of his ass. Lame.
- gharding, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33I decided I wanted to make my own metric chart based on the funability of a bunch of different languages. Mine's better because it has NUMBERS.
  
  http://www.cogjam.com/funability.jpg
- gharding, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2digg in links = sux. dp!
- seanieb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'll take your Lame and raise you a stupid. Stupid article I really don't agree with lots and lots of things that are said here.
- Browzer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I can't RTFA because the server is probably a pile of melted plastic in the basement after getting Digg'ed, but...
  
  How widely is RubyOnRails supported on webhosts these days? You can count on PHP being pretty much everywhere. Has Ruby become as common?
- Wootery, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ghard
  
  I like the way you've given 'BRAIN' and '*****' different funability ratings... though apparently BRAIN ranks higher.
- jonnyq, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Tim Bray is pretty high up on the web-standards food chain. He's a guy that would know... He may not know the intricacies of each language, but probably has a good understanding of how they relate to web development
- PrisonerOfPain, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@jonnyq: web standards and server-side scripting are two completely unrelated and fundamentally different concepts usually handled by completely incompatible people.
- stiivn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sad thing is this article is number 1 on google for "php vs java vs ruby" ...
onebit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I'll sum up the article: compare your options and choose the best one for your purpose.

The article should be titled "How to choose a web programming language" since it does not actually compare PHP, Ruby, and Java.
Hexagram, on 10/12/2007, -4/+38Apple vs Orange vs Elephant
Tim Bray outlines the basic advantages of blending each of these three items (or rather two fruits and one ***** elephant if you're scoring at home)
- CraigJ, on 10/12/2007, -37/+5So, does it blend?
- grexeo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13So, does anyone still find that funny?
- tmpoirier, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2i like the elephant comment
- MotionAesthetic, on 10/12/2007, -6/+11Shouldn't there be a python in there?
- sonofagunn, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23Dug down because "apples vs oranges" is a pet peeve of mine.
  
  An apple is crunchier than an orange. An orange is juicier. Oranges have more Vitamin C than apples.
  
  There, I did it. I just compared apples to oranges. It's a perfectly natural thing to do so it shouldn't be used as a saying against things that shouldn't be compared.
  
  By the way, it makes perfect sense to compare web development in Java vs web development with PHP vs web development with Ruby on Rails.
- RetroRufio, on 10/12/2007, -3/+10Wouldn't ASP.NET be the "Elephant?"
- ojintoad, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4A Python is a type of ASP.
- fkr2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1ASP.NET is the elephant? lol. That must be why myspace (note: ASP.NET isn't a design tool) uses it to power it's huge-assed site.
  
  Digg could massively reduce their cludgy-assed site and the crapload of servers it takes to chug through a pageview a second if they .NET'd themselves.
  
  :)
- richardiscool, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Myspace uses Coldfusion, and it's not the best example of stability...
- zzleeper, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Why is python not included?
  As we all know, Python pwns the elephant.
  
  For proof, see this:
  http://www.optimnem.co.uk/images/hat.gif
  
  Or better (if you can't figure that out), this:
  http://www.optimnem.co.uk/images/elephant.gif
  
  And that's why python pwns!! :D
- addicted68098, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It seems like Python is faster then Ruby, and faster then PHP, Django is very easy to develop in, and its also very fast at the same time.
  
  Also all languages are probably equally scalable.
AlanOrozco, on 10/12/2007, -9/+0It's funny how a site with only 35 diggs is already down.
- TBagwell, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8so... maybe php wasn't the right tool for the job?
- unununium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Digg is built on PHP and seems to be able to handle a constant Digg effect
noodlez, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16i've said it before in similar topic threads and i'll say it again:
each language is like a tool, and what language you should use depends on your problem at hand.

can you hammer in a screw? yes. but thats not the intent. use a screwdriver.
- pepote, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Amen.
- orxor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16But a screwdriver is much to light and flimsy to be used to hammer screws in.
2000, on 10/12/2007, -15/+1ASP.NET FTW!
- SwellGuy007, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Um, isn't that what ASP.net does anyway?
gharding, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Wow. PHP was ranked highest for scalability? In my opinion, it doesn't even come close to Java in that regard. Also, as both a Java AND PHP developer, I'm pretty sure I can deploy a finished app in Java quicker than PHP.. especially with the help of the nice, performance-tested frameworks out there (Spring, Struts, Shale, JSF, etc..). The guy that wrote this article doesn't seem like he knows much. His comparison was basically a chart made in Word. Impressive.
- quine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Riddle me this: how does he develop a bar chart without metrics?
- noodlez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12deploy time != scalability
- sonofagunn, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1@quine - why don't you read the article? It's shown and explained.
- quine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@sonofagunn
  
  There's got to be a sarcasm tag missing there somewhere, right? Am I the only one that is seeing the severe lack of any numerical scale on the X & Y on his comparison chart?
- sonofagunn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It is lacking a numerical scale. However, he explains that it's just an unquantifiable measurement (aka personal opinion). There's nothing wrong with that. The chart's meaning is pretty clear to me. Higher == Better.
  
  Could he have made some anal-chart-people happier if he'd given the vertical axis a meaningless scale of 1-10 - like the scale upon which we rank women? :)
- zoom1928, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4
  > it[PHP] doesn't even come close to Java in that regard.
  
  Then it doesn't sound like you've actually benchmarked it. One of our modest servers is handling just over 900 PHP hits per second at peak every single day. The Apache PHP module can load the PHP script, interprets it, and sends-out the output in less than a millisecond. A small null JSP we wrote for Apache Tomcat on the same hardware took 12 milliseconds to run. We'd have to have around 20 times the number of servers to use Java because it is so much slower than PHP. It is just too heavy weight.
  
  I've programmed on and off in Java since the summer of 1996, and I like it much better than PHP (as I assume all real programmers do!), but I can't afford the performance hit. I still do some CGI programming in Java, but that's only for smaller sites.
- kmk2006, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1zoom1928: Your weak benchmark proves nothing. I can guarantee you that Java scales 5-10 times better than PHP.
  PHP is still interpreted and Java is JIT compiled and therefore significantly faster.
  
  http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4sandbox/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all
  
  Also, I work for a website (all Java) that gets 5 million hits a day and we only have 11 servers. These servers are even
  shared with other websites owned by the same company. In fact, on each server, we're probably only using 10-20% of
  system resources.
  
  Digg (PHP) has over 90 servers.
- jbond, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"PHP is still interpreted and Java is JIT compiled and therefore significantly faster. "
  
  Sigh. Anyone running a large site on PHP will be using a PHP accelerator. Either eaccelerator or APC. Both intelligently JIT compile and cache the results.
  
  Any real world website is going to be database bound not web server bound. And with a decent load balancer you can just throw another blade webserver at it if you run out of steam at the front end. But scaling the DBMS takes skill, effort and good initial design. And it has almost nothing to do with the language used to write the front end. So what was the "Scalability" that Tim Bray was expressing an opinion about?
DieselDaddy, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5Where is ASP.net... it is a very, very nice option.
- rarkai, on 10/12/2007, -6/+12ASP is a clunky piece of *****.
- bignickolson, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3ASP .NET...keep with the times
- amarsuperstar, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5DieselDady, I agree with you, asp.net is a very nice option, however, the article is looking at open frameworks therefore it was omitted from the article.
  
  rarkai and bignickolson... please, you pair of asshats. I have been a web developer for 8 years. I have worked with PHP, ASP, ASP.NET, Java, CF and to be honest the best one is asp.net. Why? Well firstly only java/asp.net are suited for the enterprise environment (wrt php/rails) . Asp.net is more consistent than Java, and this is a big point in the long run... okay, i admit it costs more in licencing and the development model is slower, however if i have a multi million pound enterprise, i would rather stability than use php!
  
  Dont believe me? ask MIT! http://philip.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000tcP
  
  For the rest of the normal people out there.. i am not putting java down. I use it about as much i do as asp.net, they both have their stengths/weaknesses. asp.net biggest weakness being *nix support.
- palmer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Except nobody hosts on Windows. My ISP doesn't even offer it anymore.
- Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@amars
  
  I have been a web designer/developer since the early 90s and I have to strongly disagree with you. While ASP.NET is a MAJOR improvement over ASP, it is not the be-all of web programming tools. The biggest place where ASP.NET fails is that it encourages poor programming practices. The Rails interpreter may be a bit slow, but web frameworks like Django and Rails are much better than ASP.NET because they encourage (or should I say force?) good programming practices. They allow you to get a good site out quick and greatly help you in maintenance efforts.
  
  ASP.NET is all over the place with its attempts to bring VB style point-and-click programming to the web, code-behind files don't help organize your code as much as they should, VS's inability to properly support all the features of ASP.NET (e.g. nested templates - it only supports one level of nesting) is lame, and the fact that it only runs on Windows servers is a big minus as well.
  
  I am not saying that ASP.NET doesn't have its place. It does some things quite well; like localization. However, it is not "the best" by any means.
prab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17He should have tested his website for scalability.
http://www.duggmirror.com/programming/PHP_vs_Java_vs_Ruby
- prab, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8bury this
- controlguy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2oddly, he used PHP...
bignickolson, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18Also, for the record, Ruby is a language too. Rails is the framework...just as there a number of PHP and Java frameworks out there as well.
- aantix, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Finally someone points this out. It's so irritating to have people use Ruby and Rails interchangeably.
  
  Ruby is the language, Rails is a framework built on top of that language.
  
  Can someone please inform my project manager on this differentiation?
PleaseJustDie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Lame, it has 4 scales only talks briefly about one of them and gives no justification for why he ranked the other scales like he did.
dent, on 10/12/2007, -1/+83 languages - ruby on rails is a framework...
davemak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The site is under heavy load ... check out the URL of the article, the article is being served by PHP. I enjoyed working in PHP in the past but scalability seems suspect here. :)
EdThomson, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4PHP
- astatine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Thankyou, Matt Damon.
- slicedoranges, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Thank you, person who doesn't know that thank and you are two words.
alainb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12For the real info, visit Tim Bray's blog post here:
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2006/11/10/Comparing-Frameworks

As much as I respect Tim Bray, I have to disagree with his assessment in two particular areas: scalability, and dev tools.
I will admit that I do have a bias. I love Ruby and I love Rails, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

I disagree with his deduction on scalability because, and I quote:
"As for Rails, I think it’s probably the case that you can build a Web-scale app, just like Java and PHP, but we don’t know because nobody’s done it yet."

Come on! Has Tim Bray even heard of BaseCamp, Kongregate or Campfire? They're enterprise level web-apps that hosts thousands of users. Hell, Penny Arcade uses Rails and they probably get hit by a several million users every month, albeit PA doesn't have that much interactivity beyond the forums.

Secondly, his assessment of Dev Tools doesn't take into account that Rails is a framework that bleeds out the neccessity for a super-expensive dev tool. You don't need an over-complicated IDE if the language doesn't neccessitate it. Thats why TextMate fits fine for most Rails developers. They don't need anything else. Case in point, Rails doesn't have much in Dev Tools but its still the fastest to develop on AND maintain the code set.
- Jack9, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3"They're enterprise level web-apps that hosts thousands of users."
  
  That's not enterprise level. I have forums that get thousands of users per month about game mod ideas. Be serious.
- eecue, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thanks for pointing out the scalability issue. Also don't forget about one of my favorite sites, Chowhound... mmmm chow. Not only does it run on RoR, but the developers keep a very helpful blog, where they talk about the tools they use. Cool.
- Philodox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2And Penny-Arcade has ongoing problems, so maybe it's not exactly the poster boy for rails.
- alainb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Jack9:
  I should have said hundreds of thousands, but kongregate is still in beta testing (two weeks in) and have about 20,000 users. But in about a couple years, I'd wager they'd have several hundred thousand.
  
  Philodox:
  Touche! I hadn't thought of that. Honestly, I think thats more of a server issue or just messy code, than rails in and of itself.
  
  That aside, I think what I am trying point out is just because Rails isn't in widespread use at the enterprise level, doesn't mean it isn't capable at the enterprise level.
- aantix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Read David Heinemeier Hansson's blog post entitled "It's boring to scale with Ruby on Rails" ( http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000479.html ).
  
  Basically, all session management is decoupled from the framework and rests solely in the hands of the backend database. This is primarily how most PHP sites scale.
  
  So the scalability has nothing to do with the framework stack; the scalability is a function of how well the backend db scales (clustering, etc).
  
  This setup is called "shared nothing" and is quite proven in a number of enterprise configurations.
- JaredRR, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I blogged on Rails and scalability yesterday. http://www.jaredrichardson.net/blog/2007/01/31/#rails_scales
  
  Short story: check out Alexa.com's stats for ChaCha.com It's a Rails app serving in the enterprise.
lucid270, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5PERL!
- BigSlacker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I can't even remember the last time I started any new development in perl It's just too freaking slow and error prone for modern applications. It was pretty cool in it's time.
- jgtg32a, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1In some cases yes it is slower than some of the alternatives, but if used properly then it works better than most
- BigSlacker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't agree. The lack of type checking makes it highly vulnerable to unexpected failure. For example you can't make the assumption a particular variable holds a number so that adds a test case and a failure mode every time a numeric is expected. Those add up real quick
- achacha, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Performance / Complexity / Scalability / Maintainability
  
  Performance - response time under light load
  Complexity - relative complexity of the platform and how hard it will be to find developers
  Scalability - how well it can handle large loads
  Maintainability - how easy it is to maintain legacy code
  Security - how secure the base foundation platform is
  
  0 - not at all 9 - extremely
  
  PHP= P6 C3 S5 M6 S1 (PHP has more security holes than an average strainer, run a web server and see how many times you get new PHP attacks tried on it, XMLRPC, CMD.php, etc, not the fault of the language but rather what is built on top of it)
  Java= P5 C5 S3 M6 S7 (Only issue is performance and scalability, little tougher than scripting languages to hire developers)
  Ruby= P4 C4 S4 M7 S5 (Very quick to develop but does not scale well, although the devoted will tell you it runs faster than assembly)
  C++= P9 C8 S8 M6 S6 (Fastest and most scalable way to build web apps and also the toughest and very difficult to find good developers)
  perl= P4 C8 S5 M1 S5 (Easy to write, poor performer like all script languages, nightmare to maintain if more than one person works on the code)
  python= P5 C4 S5 M8 S5 (Great scripting language but slow like any other script language, advantage is that it can compile scripts at runtime which helps a bit)
  C#= P7 C5 S4 M6 S7 (Slightly better than Java but Windows only, so not as portable as Java)
BigSlacker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2These types of comparisons make as much sense as "what's better...a car, a truck, or an airplane."
- Jack9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You obviously dont work with high availability websites. 2 million users a minute, a single tomcat install is doomed. Apache with PHP is fine. Ruby is probably alright too (although there's no tools to tell if it's the doing of the framework or interpreter if Ruby fails to render).
- BigSlacker, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yes, in fact I do. PHP is not an application system like Java so comparisons are pointless. If you want to compare JSP verse PHP performance it might be mildly interesting. Hardware is far cheaper than programmers these days so performance is really a secondary consideration.
- brunson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Java is a language. If you're talking about J2EE then you're talking about an even bigger pile of crap than the Java language. J2EE is for companies with more money than brains so you can just keep throwing 5 times more hardware at the problem than if you designed it well from the get go. Slashdot, written in Perl. Photobucket, Perl and PHP. [insert big hunk of J2unk here]... written for J2EE.
- BigSlacker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sorry but you just don't understand the massive labor costs with software development. Reusable cross platform components is the future of computing.
- palmer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2^^ That was the big prediction in 1993. Never happened. The closest we got to reusable components was VBXs, which enabled you to throw together an MFC app in Windows.
ajck, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2PHP is the BEST! La-la la la, la-la laaaaaah!
SolarisX, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I work in an organisation that has a bias for opensource sytems.. Im soo sick of php mysql combos... any new development I do always relies on the sweet ass candy j2ee/struts/hibernate. PHP is dead!!!! :-)

Flame on!
- ajck, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1You are SO gay. And I mean that in the most insulting way possible.
addicted68098, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3In a nutshell,
performance/devtime/Scallabity
Ruby - Slow/Fast/OK
PHP - Med/Medium/Good
Django Fast/Fast/OK-Good

Ruby seems to be something that is simply trendy but less functional then less trendy Django
- Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Django is awesome. It is still missing some nice features that Rails has, but the opposite is also true. The only reason I'm not using Django and I am using Ruby on Rails right now is because my customers are worried that Django will change too much between now and whenever 1.0 is supposed to be released. As soon as 1.0 is released, that problem will go away.
jonnyq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0comparing php and java to rails is apples and oranges. rails is a library (or something) for ruby that does a bunch of fancy things on top of ruby. I think there are similar things for java (struts?). there may be similar things for php, but either way, it's not that hard to roll your own "rails" for php.

ruby doesn't have good enough documentation for me, and it doesn't have enough good libraries. It's a beautiful, simple, powerful language. When ruby's documentation and features are as good as all the stuff you see in the manual at php.net, I'll be all over it.

even though php isn't object oriented, you can make your own classes, etc., all day. just the basic data types are not OO. That's really the only difference I see.

I really don't see any reason to favor any language over the other, except according to what documentation and function/class libraries you have handy. If you've class library that can grok xml and xsl, do stuff with mysql, sling files around in the filesystem, ftp stuff around, generate dynamic images, do HTTP things, do shell commands, and you've got enough documentation to support it, then it doesn't matter what language you use.
cmdrNacho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think its all about how familiar you are with each language, and yes ruby is a language. I can throw together an app, in Spring (MVC) and Hibernate, in about the same time as I could in Ruby (rails) or PHP.

As far as extending functionality to handle crazy algorithms and such... Java is the clear winner.

For simple applications , CRUD.. it would be better to do them in Ruby ..PHP... but thats why JEE is an enterprise solution, it requires a lot more complexity , than a simple CRUD app. Do you really think you can handle the complex algorithm that is Google's search engine with just PHP or Ruby.

This guy is really not giving all the details
- cosmo7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thanks for mentioning MVC.
  
  I've found that the framework used is generally more significant than the language. Essentially:
  
  Zend Framework > Usual PHP *****
  Spring MVC > Insanely complex Java mess
  Django > typical Mad Scientist python operation
- jonnyq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Please stop making Rails and Ruby sound like they're the same thing. Ruby is the language. Rails is a bunch of stuff on top of the language that does CRUD for you, which is great if you like its style. One might even find a compelling reason to use Ruby without Rails.
  
  The only way Ruby can compete with others is with Rails, and if you don't like rails, using Ruby for web development is going to be significantly more difficult than with PHP or Java.
  
  Ruby is a BEAUTIFUL language. I'm just going to wait a year or two more until there's better documentation before I start rewriting PHP libraries in Ruby.
- sintaks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@cosmo7
  
  Django is surprisingly simple. The thing I love best about it is the loose coupling of your actual Django applications. You can have a single instance of a Django app being used in multiple projects without having duplicated directories or funky symlinks going everywhere. A Django app is essentially just a Python package. A view is a function call in that package.
  
  People get confused because they say there "is no real controller". In a sense, that's right. The Django developers themselves have insisted that Django is a MVT framework - Model, View, Template. If you were to put it into MVC terms, Django's "Controller" is the framework's router and the View function called, and it's proper "View" is the Template.
  
  Now... if only someone would implement a Ruby-version of Django...
  
  Mawp.
cherouvim, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@cosmo7: OK, and what do you propose?
theplayfulcat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've used c, c++, Perl, java, PLSQL (yes PLSQL), php, ASP, cold fusion ..... to build very interactive websites.... and Ive found that, by far, good object oriented programming techniques, with a strongly typed language (which PHP aint got), and a good architecture (MVC2) is the most important thing if you have any intention
of maintaining and extending the site for more than a few months....
Java with a good back-end app-server, is, by far, the only real choice for a serious website .
bdunwood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1For those in the thread who don't know who Tim Bray is, its worth your time to check a bit of his history. Not many folks bring the perspective he has to the table. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Bray. His blog is also enlightening: http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/. He's currently director of Web Technologies at Sun.

I find that the take away from his comments and the article is the focus on software lifetime and total cost of ownership. Tim said it best: "Good apps, once built, tend to be in production for an astonishingly long time. Which means that they have to be maintained for an astonishingly long time. Which means that maintainability is important."

In my opinion, if you're building real apps and not prototypes, ease of development and scalability are nothing compared to ease of long term maintenance and extensibility.

Disclosure:
I run www.cmswire.com and yes, we had a server meltdown yesterday. Thanks for all the love!
greldenax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ruby is not a framework. Rails is a framework. Ruby is a language.
stanchan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Python wins in scalability cause it's the language of choice at Google/YouTube!
larryrobinson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0All the script kiddies out there should be able to explain why or when (++stupid) is better or worse then (stupid++) without googling it.

Once you can do that you'll realize that performance problems are usually 90% programmer and 10% language.

Then this debate can switch from which language is better to how sharp is your skills!
- sintaks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anyone who's taken a beginning CS class should know that pre-increment is faster... unless you went to my college, in which case you probably don't.
  
  In some cases, the compiler optimizes that anyhow, making it a matter of personal preference. As we all know, we should never succumb to premature optimization. ;-)
Tecfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I was number 1000 o/
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

PHP vs Java vs Ruby

Login or register to add a comment