Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!dbuck
From: dbuck@superior.carleton.ca (Dave Buck)
Subject: Re: The Future of Smalltalk Performance?
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: superior.carleton.ca
Message-ID: <DL3Ds2.7KG@cunews.carleton.ca>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
References: <4crvvl$jd5@news.jf.intel.com> <4cvkp5$je5@canton.charm.net> <4d5n5f$i87@homer.alpha.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 23:40:50 GMT
Lines: 33

In article <4d5n5f$i87@homer.alpha.net>,
Robert Sutherland <ccggcc@homer.alpha.net> wrote:
>It would be worth a lot.  I'm re-writing a Smalltalk app in C++ because
>even with using a DLL I couldn't get the ST app fast enough.  I really
>miss the development speed of ST, though, and my Symantec C++ is the 
>fastest C++ compiler I've ever seen.
>
>Bob Sutherland

Before re-writing an app in C++, I'd ask the following questions:
   1) Have you done performance testing of the Smalltalk app to locate
what's too slow?
   2) Can you use algorithmetic improvements to speed it up?
   3) Is there anything "stupid" going on that you don't know about?
(i.e., do performance testing)

In my tests, I've found that C++ is typically not much faster than
Smalltalk.  Smalltalk is slow for massive floating point calculations,
massive integer calculations, and massive bitwise calculations.
Otherwise, C++ is the same speed and sometimes slower than Smalltalk.
The way to make C++ faster is to eliminate the OO aspects which turns
it into C and makes it much more difficult to maintain.  Don't be
surprised if your application isn't much faster than the Smalltalk
version.

David Buck
dbuck@ccs.carleton.ca

_________________________________
| David K. Buck                 |
| dbuck@ccs.carleton.ca         |
| The Object People             |
|_______________________________|
