No D in Great Computer Language Shootout?
retard
re at tard.com.invalid
Sat Dec 26 14:56:29 PST 2009
Sat, 26 Dec 2009 20:27:43 +0000, Isaac Gouy wrote:
> Thu, 17 Dec 2009 retard wrote
>
>> My point was that the language shootout has a lot more publicity than
>> some 3rd party mini benchmark site. Almost everyone knows the site.
>
> That isn't accidental.
>
> Put the effort into making an interesting D benchmark site and making it
> well known.
I don't like benchmarks that advertise a single language. I think yours
is just fine, but it could support the PL diversity a bit more. I know
adding more language support and more testable features requires extra
effort, but IMHO the test has become less and less useful now that all
interesting languages suddenly disappeared.
Another thing, probably all JVM language implementations benefit from -
server switch or "steady state". But you only list those results for
Java. There's also gcj which produces native Java(/jvm language)
executables.
GCC 4.3 is used although 4.4 is available. It seems I'm using 4.4.2 and
have been using 4.4 for a long while - I even compile my kernel with it
despite all warnings. It would be interesting to know how much faster the
new one is. And how much faster the development version of 4.5 is. Same
thing with Java 7 / jvm languages - the early access version is already
out and has much better support for scalar replacement and other
optimizations than the currently tested version. I made a small test run
and Java 7 executed one of the tests in 50% less time compared to Java 6.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list