« … With Ruby Infrastructure. » Ruby isn’t doing the compute. Instead, Ruby is used to distribute and run workloads on individual machines. The underlying project is Peplum: https://rubygems.org/gems/peplum/versions/0.3.3
Ruby 3.2 comes with YJIT which is a new JIT compiler Ruby totally rewritten in rust. Also native Ruby extensions can now be written in rust in addition to C. So the ecosystem here lets you write C, Rust or Ruby.
I agree with the first half of what you said, but for people considering MineClone2, be aware that it doesn't have the same mod support as the base game, and so modifying it doesn't always work well. It also adds some of Minecraft's limitations that were otherwise missing in Minetest, such as a more restrictive height limit in both directions. You can normally dig much much deeper and climb much higher in Minetest than Minecraft, and I think this is one of the cooler parts of Minetest.
MineClone2 is fun if you know Minecraft and you want something ready to play immediately, but if you have a background of playing modded Minecraft, don't expect to be able to take all the cool Minetest mods and slap them over MineClone2. This means you're playing a clone of vanilla Minecraft. For many this isn't very fun anymore. You'll probably want to start from scratch and build on top of the default minetest_game to enjoy all the cool mods out there, such as df_caverns.
i found a server with a nice community, which is what keeps me playing. but to start my own world i'd wish for better map generators. more realistic mountains, rivers, climates, etc.
and maybe some powerful tools would be nice, to efficiently build streets or dig new rivers, grow mountains, ... so you can efficiently create a map by hand, or modify a map to add or remove features.
fortunately, new map generators are being worked on, so there is hope for the future.
I don't see anywhere where they claim that it's faster simply because it's written in C++. They do mention that they make use of C++ to add low level optimizations that make queries faster and the memory imprint smaller, but any claims about performance in the readme are linked to benchmarks to back up their claims
It is unlikely that it is because of C++, however, we have conducted extensive benchmarking (which, by the way, is fully open-source and can be easily reproduced if desired). You can find more information about this at https://manticoresearch.com/blog/manticore-alternative-to-el....
Also, architectural changes. They describe how ES can't parallelize a query unless it's spread across multiple index shards, which has its own tradeoffs. Their query engine can parallelize a query on a single index shard, which means it scales much more linearly on more cores without having to make those tradeoffs.
C/++ actually make you write relatively slow code too, by default. Not to the extent of Java, but still there is HUGE room for improvement in libC and by extension the STL. I'm working on a slash-and-burn approach to the problem here:
https://github.com/cons-cat/libcat
