On 5/30/13, Jens Alfke <j...@mooseyard.com> wrote: > > On May 29, 2013, at 11:35 PM, Eric Wing <ewmail...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> In my introduction, I was fairly adamant that time lost to impedance >> mis-match should be measured because my interest was real performance >> in using these libraries for projects based in C. That conversion time >> is non-trivial. > > If you’re coding in C, I don’t think it makes sense to consider other > languages (except maybe C++) just for their hashtable implementations! > There’s inevitably going to be impedance mismatch: not just with data > conversion but also memory management, since most of the languages you > tested are garbage collected. That means you now have two heaps (a GC heap > embedded inside your malloc heap) and extra memory usage and cost for > running the GC. Not to mention the bloat on your app’s code size. > > Surely there are enough reusable C-based hashtable libraries that you don’t > need to embed a whole Lua or Python interpreter just for that purpose. (And > if not, it’s really easy to write one.) > > —Jens
So that's all in the introduction too. But that's all conjecture. Performance tuning requires actual measurement/benchmarking. The question was to put it to the test. The results most people found surprising because a lot of conventional wisdom did not hold up. -Eric -- Beginning iPhone Games Development http://playcontrol.net/iphonegamebook/ _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
