Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java,comp.lang.functional,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in3.uu.net!allegra!akalice!ark
From: ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Subject: Re: Three languages: A performance comparison
Message-ID: <DvItJz.2p2@research.att.com>
Organization: AT&T Research, Murray Hill NJ
References: <4tipb5$2g4c@piglet.cc.uic.edu> <4tjv06$erb@blackice.winternet.com> <31FEBCD7.561@acl.lanl.gov>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 17:21:35 GMT
Lines: 15
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.java.programmer:2878 comp.lang.java:73791 comp.lang.functional:7731 comp.lang.misc:26446 comp.lang.smalltalk:41804 comp.lang.c:199740 comp.lang.c++:204035

In article <31FEBCD7.561@acl.lanl.gov> Jonathan Moody <jwmoody@acl.lanl.gov> writes:

> Yes, but isn't it a testimony to the power of ML that the original
> poster was able to implement, "from scratch" some bignum operations 
> in only 10 min, when coding in java and C++ took over an hour. And 
> the ML implementation was faster!

It's more of a testimony to the particular set of skills and biases
of the original poster.  My C++ version didn't take much more than
10 minutes to implement (I didn't time it, unfortunately, but there
was nothing particularly hard about it), and it ran about 8 times as
fast as the ML version.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@research.att.com
