No D in Great Computer Language Shootout?

[Isaac Gouy]

retard Wrote:

> 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. 

No, other JVM based implementations are run with -server.


> There's also gcj which produces native Java(/jvm language) 
> executables.

There's always another and another and another language implementation.


> GCC 4.3 is used although 4.4 is available.

No, 4.4 is used for the x86 Ubuntu measurements.


> 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.


It seems like you want measurements for bleeding edge versions and a bunch of languages that are interesting to you - but you can't be bothered making those measurements yourself.

Oh well.