On Apr 26, 2016 12:19 AM, "Mars0i" <marsh...@logical.net> wrote: > > On Monday, April 25, 2016 at 3:50:45 PM UTC-5, tbc++ wrote: >> >> As someone who has spent a fair amount of time playing around with such things, I'd have to say people vastly misjudge the raw speed you get from the JVM's JIT and GC. In fact, I'd challenge someone to come up with a general use, dynamic language that is not based on the JVM and comes even close to the speed of Clojure. > > > I was going to say that I'd be surprised if Clojure were as fast as SBCL (overall, on average, depends on your application, depends on how you code it, ymmv, etc. ...). Then I stopped back to check the little benchmarks on the Computer Language Benchmarks Game . Whatever it is that those comparisons do, or don't prove, I would no longer be surprised. > Wow. I was going to suggest Lua, but according to the benchmarks it's not even in the same league. I wonder what the benchmarks would look like if they included calls out to C libs.
-- 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 Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. 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 --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
