🚀 go-pugleaf

:-> In gnu.misc.discuss, rsanders@mindspring.com (Robert Sanders) writes:
:I won't dispute that, but...
:that wasn't the point you made; you said that a program written in language 
:X will run faster than the same program translated from X into language Y.  
:e.g. that translating a program written in python, perl, or ksh into Scheme 
:would slow it down.  That depends heavily on the comparative quality of
:the implementations of X and Y.

I was thinking of things like fortran to C, in which you lose all the nice
optimizations that fortran can do because of language-defined assumptions
regarding passed in arrays or built-in functions, or awk to perl, in which
the perl code generated is forced to assume use hashed arrays instead of
numeric ones, or that comparisons are string not numeric comparisons, or
that each line must be split up into little fields.


:I've used several of those counterexamples.  GCL, a lisp to C compiler, 
:outruns CLISP's byte-code interpreter.  

Stop.  That's not the same.  You're comparing a interpreted bytecode
with generated C code.  That's not the same.  A more appropriate 
comparison would be byte-code interpreted lisp versus byte-code
interpreted scheme that was itself generated from the lisp code
we are also benchmarking.

--tom
-- 
Tom Christiansen      Perl Consultant, Gamer, Hiker      tchrist@mox.perl.com