On Aug 7, 8:08 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Really how silly can it be when you suggest someone is taking a > position and tweaking the benchmarks to prove a point [...]
I certainly didn't intend to suggest that you had tweaked -anything- to prove your point. I do, however, think there is little value in slavishly implementing the same algorithm in different languages. To constrain a dynamic language by what can be achieved in a static language seemed like such an -amazingly- artificial constraint to me. That you're a fan of Python makes such a decision even more confusing. It's great that you saw value in Python enough to choose it for actual project work. It's a shame you didn't endeavour to understand it well enough before including it in your benchmark. As for it being "disappointing", the real question is: has it been disappointing for you in actual real-world code? Honestly, performance benchmarks seem to be the dick size comparison of programming languages. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
