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