Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!news.duke.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!utnut!nott!cunews!tina.mrco.carleton.ca!knight
From: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Subject: Re: Digitalk... The end...
Message-ID: <knight.793671500@tina.mrco.carleton.ca>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Organization: Carleton University
References: <3iisun$f1l@cedar.mr.net> <3il3ki$e0k@news1.delphi.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 1995 00:18:20 GMT
Lines: 27

In <3il3ki$e0k@news1.delphi.com> jsutherland@BIX.com (Jeff Sutherland) writes:

>Here are some benchmarks that mean more than Smopstones ...

>>I visited [a major world bank] last week and I tested Enfin V4.1 and
>VisualAge 2.0 on a >486DX2/66Mhz, 16MB Ram machine (OS/2 V2.11)

... a variety of benchmarks demonstrating how slow VisualAge can be
when run on a machine with inadequate memory...

While benchmarks are often of dubious significance, these are
particularly bad. To claim that these "mean more than Smopstones" is
blatantly self-serving (and you should do a better job of indicating
that you work for the company that produces Enfin). I believe
VisualAge lists 24MB as their minimum memory. To run it on a 16MB
machine and pretend the results have anything to do with its execution
speed is ridiculous. Yes, VisualAge has a large footprint. Yes, there
are more meaningful benchmarks than Smopstones. These aren't them.




-- 
 Alan Knight                | The Object People
 knight@acm.org             | Smalltalk and OO Training and Consulting
 alan_knight@mindlink.bc.ca | 509-885 Meadowlands Dr.
 +1 613 225 8812            | Ottawa, Canada, K2C 3N2
