Nokogiri VS crystal

release planning: v1.16.0 · Issue #2897 · sparklemotion/nokogiri

What's holding me back from going all in with Crystal is I have a lot of pre-existing Ruby code, and porting Ruby code to Crystal can be tricky. For example, Crystal lacks an Enumerator class (aka generators) due to captured block semantics. I also wish the shards ecosystem was a little more mature; for example there's multiple HTML parsing libraries, but none have all of the features that Ruby's Nokogiri has. For new greenfield backend projects, I would totally use Crystal.

Welcome! Ruby isn't exactly "dying", but the hype/popularity is definitely fading. This is primarily because Ruby is no longer "new", most of Ruby's popularity came from Rails, and now Rails is no longer the "new hotness". However, Ruby still has lots of awesome features and lots of awesome other libraries and frameworks, such as the new fancy irb gem that uses reline, nokogiri, chunky_png, the async gems, Dragon Ruby, SciRuby, Ronin, and the new Hanami web framework.

great for hacking at xml

Mike has worked hard over the years to have Nokogiri come with its dependencies. It does come with libxml and all that is required.

From https://nokogiri.org

> These dependencies are met by default by Nokogiri's packaged versions of the libxml2 and libxslt source code, but a configuration option --use-system-libraries is provided to allow specification of alternative library locations.

Some authors work hard to have their tools do the right thing and consistently.

If the page is rendered as html you can use Nokogiri. It has great support and is pretty easy to get started with too.

And even now, pulling in a Java-based HTML5 parser is still probably easier than re-implementing in FFI, which is why I created https://github.com/sparklemotion/nokogiri/issues/2227 and would love to have this the conversation there if possible.

27. Crystal - $77,104

I like the first code example on https://crystal-lang.org

    # A very basic HTTP server

Obviously as an interpreted language, it's never going to be as fast as something like C, Rust, or Go. Traditionally the ruby maintainers have not designed or optimized for pure speed, but that is changing, and the language is definitely faster these days compared to a decade ago.

If you like the ruby syntax/language but want the speed of a compiled language, it's also worth checking out Crystal[^1]. It's mostly ruby-like in syntax, style, and developer ergonomics.[^2] Although it's an entirely different language. Also a tiny community.

[1]: https://crystal-lang.org/

Crystal is a nice language that's not only simple to read and write but performs very well too. And the documentation is amazing as well.

Ruby is a super fun scripting language. I much prefer it to python when I need something with a little more "ooomph" than bash. It's just...nice...to write in. Ruby performance has come a long way in the last decade as well. There's libraries for pretty much everything.

My modern programming toolkit is basically golang + ruby + bash and I am never left wanting.

I do find Crystal (https://crystal-lang.org/) really interesting and am hoping it has its own "ruby on rails" moment that helps the language reach a tipping point in popularity. All the beauty of ruby with all of the speed of Go (and then some, it often compares favorably to languages like rust in benchmarks).