C# vs Ruby

Compiled vs Interpreted | Static vs Dynamic

Although both languages are examples of Object-Oriented Programming, they are some key differences that will influence which language better suits your needs:

- Syntax -

Ruby is a dynamically-typed language, while C# is statically typed. Before we go further, let me explain these two paradigms.

Variable Declaration -

In a statically typed language, the variable type must be declared before the code is compiled and run, whereas, in a dynamically typed language, variable types are not required to be declared explicitly.

Type Checking -

Statically typed languages perform type-checking when compiled, which ensures that the code is free from type-related errors before it is run. In contrast, dynamically typed languages perform type checking at runtime, which can result in type-related errors only appearing during the execution of the code.

Ease of Use -

Dynamically typed languages are often considered easier to use because they don’t require the programmer to understand and declare variable types. This can hasten development time and make code more flexible. However, it can also make code more difficult to read and maintain over time.

Error Detection -

Statically typed languages can catch type-related errors at compile time, making it easier to find and fix bugs in the code. Dynamically typed languages may not catch such errors until runtime, which can be more challenging to debug.

- Performance -

C# is regarded as a faster and more efficient language because it’s a compiled language, whereas Ruby is an interpreted language.

Compiled languages are generally faster because the source code is translated into machine code at build-time, through an intermediate language, to then be directly processed by the CPU. This is the reason compiled languages are statically typed.

Because interpreted languages are translated at run-time, their performance tends to skew downward when directly compared to compiled languages. All of this is still dependent on the skills of the developer. A beginner can build a compiled language program that runs slower than an interpreted language program written by an expert. That’s why no matter the language, you should always try to keep your code as dry as possible.

- Scalability -

A compiled language can be optimized for whatever platform it’s running on. As the project grows, the code will be easier to maintain. Interpreted languages have an advantage when it comes to development time. Because an interpreted program is translated at run-time, it can speak to multiple different machine architectures without needing a re-compile. An application that is developed using an interpreted language will generally release in a faster timeframe than a compiled language, but as that project continues to scale up in users, the code will get harder to debug and maintain.

- Summary -

There are upsides and downsides to both language types. Your choice in the matter should be based on your personal needs for your project. Generally, a compiled language will be better suited for a project that needs to remain as optimized as possible and will continue to scale up in users, whereas an interpreted language works best when you have a tighter development budget and need to complete the project quickly. In the end, language preferences are unique to the individual, but you should always strive to learn and grow with as many languages as you can. Keep exploring!