From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,15edb893ef79e231
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: f4fd2,23202754c9ce78dd
X-Google-Attributes: gidf4fd2,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,15edb893ef79e231
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 114809,15edb893ef79e231
X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-01-14 05:52:19 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!news.netcologne.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.smalltalk
Subject: Re: True faiths ( was Re: The true faith )
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:52:16 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <a1unqg$7te$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <n7ybsg9lq8y.fsf@panix1.panix.com>
 <3c36fbc5_10@news.newsgroups.com> <gat-0501022256350001@192.168.1.50>
 <4idg3u40ermnp682n6igc5gudp7hajkea9@4ax.com>
 <gat-1001021155210001@eglaptop.jpl.nasa.gov>
 <bruce-6C0AC5.10391411012002@news.paradise.net.nz>
 <gat-1001021515510001@192.168.1.50>
 <76be8851.0201101909.9db0718@posting.google.com>
 <gat-1101020950400001@eglaptop.jpl.nasa.gov>
 <9jtu3u8cq92b05j47uat3412tok6hqu1ki@4ax.com> <3C3FB4CA.14998012@nyc.rr.com>
 <0gjv3ucg1tb0guamnkcalt4sq1ki9plv2o@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1011016336 8110 134.91.4.34 (14 Jan 2002
 13:52:16 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:52:16 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/800))
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.lisp:24253 comp.lang.ada:18898
 comp.lang.eiffel:5400 comp.lang.smalltalk:17914
Date: 2002-01-14T13:52:16+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In comp.lang.ada israel r t <israelrt@optushome.com.au> wrote:
 
: And Ocaml wins again !  :-)
 
: And speeeeeeed !
: ( As if it really matters with commodity 2 GHz processors... )

For a decision to be taken shortly, I have compared your
loosers (and more of them) to SML-NJ, Ruby, and SNOBOL4.
Task: do lots of calculations with (alledgedly double prec.)
reals. Result (with optimization, where I know how to achieve it
with compiler switches, with and without range checking):
loosers other than Java: in the range of 10-15 time units,
ML: 45,
Java: 70,  (though default compiler options in VAJ 3.5/Win)
Scripting languages: aborted, since they were alread running
for a very long time doing only 10000 iterations, where the
others had run 1Mio times.

It would be interesting to learn whether or not OCaml or any other
of the more pleasing very high level languages are
significantly faster than SML-NL in this respect (since we have to
think about some real time/response time constraints).

Java seems to be adventurous anyway when it comes to fpt,
according to Kahan, so there...

(eAsk me for details if you are interested.)

-- Georg