Daniël Mantione wrote:
Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Bisma Jayadi:
No C programs have been submitted recently. It is probably the new broken
scoring system.
Is Shootout using new scoring system? How did you know that?
See the long thread on the forum. It penalizes Pascal because we have a
b
Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Christian Ulrich:
>
> > Very few OOP is used in the Pascal implementations, so Pascal and C are
> > on equal grounds here.
> >
> musnt the memory manager included if only few oo stuff is included ?
? The heap manager is always in the exe; it cannot be smarlinked a
Very few OOP is used in the Pascal implementations, so Pascal and C are on
equal grounds here.
musnt the memory manager included if only few oo stuff is included ?
why g++ is soo mutch slower than gcc if so few oo stuff is used ??
pure c is no higher level laguage for me. asm is not soo mut
Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Christian Ulrich:
> NO: C gcc has the first Place C is not Object oriented, FPC is Object
> oriented.
Very few OOP is used in the Pascal implementations, so Pascal and C are on
equal grounds here.
Daniël___
fpc-pascal ma
NO: C gcc has the first Place C is not Object oriented, FPC is Object
oriented.
And g++ is behind fpc.
regards
Christian
Bisma Jayadi schrieb:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all&xfullcpu=1&xmem=1&xloc=0&binarytrees=1&chameneos=1&message=1&fannkuch=1&fasta=1&kn
The one missing FPC program measures the speed and abilities of the regular
expressions engine from language distribution.
Tonow FPC one has not enough abilities, but the engine may be written even
exclusively in assembler or C: what matters is whether it is present in the
distribution and has
It's obvious that the benchmark is flawed. This is also stated at
their website. everyone knows that benchmarks are flawed
I'd say it's more like a game.
But, it's also interresting to see that in all benchmarks I've ever
seen Perl, Python and Java are dozens of times slower and consumes
dozens
Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Jonas Maebe:
>
> On 23 mei 2007, at 10:39, Bisma Jayadi wrote:
>
> > Of course it's very relevant since they are all using same algorithms
>
> No, because there are lot of ways to implement a single algorithm. Do you use
> ansistrings, shortstrings, arrays of char
On 23 mei 2007, at 10:39, Bisma Jayadi wrote:
Of course it's very relevant since they are all using same algorithms
No, because there are lot of ways to implement a single algorithm. Do
you use ansistrings, shortstrings, arrays of char, or pchars? Do you
use getmem or dynamic arrays? Do y
Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Bisma Jayadi:
> > No C programs have been submitted recently. It is probably the new broken
> > scoring system.
>
> Is Shootout using new scoring system? How did you know that?
See the long thread on the forum. It penalizes Pascal because we have a
bad score for C
favourite compiler/language, but largely irrelevant as far as comparing
different compilers is concerned (and even more so as far as comparing
different programming languages is concerned).
Of course it's very relevant since they are all using same algorithms (please
read http://shootout.aliot
No C programs have been submitted recently. It is probably the new
broken scoring system.
Is Shootout using new scoring system? How did you know that?
-Bee-
has Bee.ography at:
http://beeography.wordpress.com
___
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@l
Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Bisma Jayadi:
> http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all&xfullcpu=1&xmem=1&xloc=0&binarytrees=1&chameneos=1&message=1&fannkuch=1&fasta=1&knucleotide=1&mandelbrot=1&meteor=0&nbody=1&nsieve=1&nsievebits=1&partialsums=1&pidigits=1&recursive=
On 23 mei 2007, at 10:16, Bisma Jayadi wrote:
Obviously, some C programmers has done some more optimizations. :(
So it obviously means that gcc does not beat fpc (and that fpc did
not beat gcc before), but simply that the C programs beat the Pascal
programs (and that it was the other way
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all&xfullcpu=1&xmem=1&xloc=0&binarytrees=1&chameneos=1&message=1&fannkuch=1&fasta=1&knucleotide=1&mandelbrot=1&meteor=0&nbody=1&nsieve=1&nsievebits=1&partialsums=1&pidigits=1&recursive=1®exdna=0&revcomp=1&spectralnorm=1&hello=1&sumc
15 matches
Mail list logo
