On Feb 2, 10:29 pm, David Nolen <dnolen.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Heh, this is a more reasoned reply than my own as it points out an actual > implementation difference between Python and Clojure. And of course you > might need arbitrary precision arithmetic in your program, but again this > just reinforces the insignificance of microbenchmarks without some context > of what you are actually trying to achieve. > > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Christian Vest Hansen > <karmazi...@gmail.com>wrote: > > It is safe to assume that Python uses the GMP library for its infinite > > precision math, no? This could be a big part of the explanation as, if > > the language shootouts are to be believed, BigInteger and BigDecimal > > have inferior performance when compared to what can be achieved with > > GMP.
Well, Python uses home-grown arbitrary precision numbers: http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Objects/intobject.c?rev=68381&view=markup http://svn.python.org/view/python/trunk/Objects/longobject.c?rev=68975&view=markup Anyway, I am not trying to prove that Clojure is slow or anything like that. Out of curiosity: are there any public Clojure benchmarks available? Anything like Great Computer Languages Shootout benchmarks? It will be very interesting to play with them a bit, comparing them to Java ones, for example. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
