[Mono-list] lies and microbenmarks (Was: Mono 0.23 windows installer)
Mon, 31 Mar 2003 14:25:38 +1000
On 30-Mar-2003, Stefan Matthias Aust <email@example.com> wrote:
> Fergus Henderson wrote:
> >On 29-Mar-2003, Stefan Matthias Aust <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >>Still you won't get efficient dynamic languages, no Lisp, no Smalltalk,
> >>no Ruby or Python. Fortunatley, computers are probably fast enough to
> >>sacrify one order of magnitute of performance for better languages with
> >>better development performance (using python for rapid prototyping
> >>instead of C for example).
> >What makes you think that it will only be one order of magnitude?
> Wild guess.
> I remember an article by Aubrey Jaffer talking about his
> scheme interpreter being 10 times to 50 times slower than an equivalent
> C program. That's an order of magnitude.
No, that's 1 to 1.7 orders of magnitude. But that's the slow-down for
native code. My point really is that the relative slow-down of dynamic
languages compared to statically typed languages might be worse for .NET
CLR code than than it is for native code.
Fergus Henderson <email@example.com> | "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.