Language Shootout

[janderson]

David B. Held wrote:
> janderson wrote:
>> [...]
>> That would be a C verse C comparison.  I don't think that would be of 
>> much advantage.  I think the C++ version should be OO too (not that we 
>> can change that).
>>
>> D really needs to be done in a way that looks like D.  Hopefully, the 
>> extra overhead can be optimized in other ways.
> 
> The FAQ clearly states that you should write the program in the fastest 
> manner possible.  I think we can agree that inline asm is not 
> appropriate for C/C++/D, but I think it's perfectly fair to forego the 
> OOP aspects of the langauge where it is possible to do so and realize a 
> speed benefit.  After all, that is much of the point of D, isn't it? You 
> can't exactly shoehorn stack objects into Java, and that is much of what 
> makes the Language Shootout relevant.
> 
> So what if it turns out to be C vs. C?  That would be great advertising 
> for D, IMO.  The fact that D is in the top 5 on both platforms for this 
> test is great.  The fact that C++ is actually faster than C in some 
> cases is very interesting and worth of consideration.  The assumption 
> that C is automatically the fastest language does not always hold.  The 
> fact that Eiffel is near the top is interesting, as well as Scala.  The 
> fact that Haskell is 5-6x slower than C is also very interesting.
> 
> If you want a test that exercises the OOP aspects of languages, perhaps 
> we could create a reasonable one and suggest it to the Shootout.
> 
> Dave

Actually I'm not a huge oop fan, I kinda just wanted peoples reaction. 
If the algorithm makes sense as a free function, then do it that way.

-Joel