Indeed, making an engine is a guaranteed reward. You put in time, make an engine that can draw something, and you succeed, receiving a dopamine reward. But making a game is really risky; a programmer may put in a lot of time and hope, then still fail. I think lots of programmers don't want to take the risk of failure.
Thanks for correcting. Compared to the original, the documentation is just replaced with some keywords. It needs more works to do to make it a useful tutorial.
Now tell me, did you initially learn to code just because you liked fast things? There is more to it.. it's sad when these "once-IT-lovers" forget about this part completely.
I believe that Ruby was born in the first place with a kind of a sentiment of not wanting at all to become the speed optimization guy if that ever means sacrificing the part in itself that allows for so much freedom and creativity!
And I guess this is exactly how the community around it feels it.
You get the good milliseconds stats, plus money.
A Rubyist might respond with a bunch of more ms. here and there(for now); he gets the same money; he has much more fun.
Is it so hard to understand ?
Do you still enjoy programming like you did in the first days?
If not, take a look at Ruby, seriously :)
Probably, better Ruby performance will come with time, but if Ruby will fail in the long term, then it will happen just because of a new more performant, but equally (or more) fun/smart language.
In conclusion I think that Ruby has the merit of having woken up the feeling that programming can always be as fun as the first days and.. that it doesn't have to transform you into a sad, dissociative geeky looking person anymore.. :P
