That's pretty encouraging! :-D The language does work as advertised, but is still under development. One shouldn't expect it to crush Java on speed, nor take full advantage of multiple processors... yet.
Clojure is a language for the future, after all. It can only get better. Whereas Java will always be a slave to clock-rate. Stephen C. Gilardi wrote: > On Dec 7, 2008, at 10:11 AM, Peter Wolf wrote: > > >> Shouldn't the number of processors on the test machine make a big >> difference to how fast it runs? Whereas, the Java version is only >> dependent on the clock rate of the individual processors. >> > > Replacing the "map" call with "pmap" on a 2 core machine improved my > time by about 6% (the code was already keeping both cores pretty busy). > > On a 4 core machine it brought the time from 6.8 seconds down to 4.7. > > On the same 4 core machine, the Java version posted by the original > poster runs in 1.3 seconds including JVM launch time. > > I tried use clojure.parallel's preduce as well, but on my 4 core > machine it didn't affect the time. > > --Steve > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
