Dave Dyer wrote: > At 05:24 AM 12/12/2007, Don Dailey wrote: > >> I've looked into this a bit. My preference would be scheme and it's >> my understanding that it may be a bit more efficient. >> > > If you're worried about efficient use of the machine, stay away from lisp > and scheme. Despite the claims of "it can be as fast as C", you have to > work hard and perform unnatural (from the viewpoint of lisp) acts to get > anywhere near there. There are deep architectural reasons why lisp is not > as efficient as C when used as directed. > > Use lisp if you're concerned with promoting efficient use of your brain. > > I've never seen the claim of C-like speed ever hold up. I believe this is for 2 reasons:
1. compiler technology - huge emphasis on make C fast. Years of work improving this. 2. CPU - I believe all modern general purpose processors are more or less designed to execute C code fast. - Don > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
