home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.magmacom.com!Jan
- From: Jan@Bytesmiths.com (Jan Steinman)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.java,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk
- Subject: Re: Will Java kill C++?
- Date: 15 Apr 1996 04:58:42 GMT
- Organization: Bytesmiths, the Smalltalk start-up specialists
- Message-ID: <Jan-1404962357150001@news.magmacom.com>
- References: <3134D499.653E@ix.netcom.com> <313613B2.136E@ksopk.sprint.com> <4i7qhl$ik6@cronkite.seas.gwu.edu> <4iuhi7$fmf@sundog.tiac.net> <4iumap$mn5@hustle.rahul.net> <31582A45.3742@vmark.com> <3163C031.4FB1@esec.ch> <3164888D.2B01@concentric.net> <4kbfn8$1bu@news1.is.net> <316971B0.FEF@amd.com> <Jan-1104960033370001@news.magmacom.com> <3171397F.4C3F@ibm.net>
- Reply-To: Jan@Bytesmiths.com
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.116.214.1
- X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.2.0b6
-
- In article <3171397F.4C3F@ibm.net>, John M McIntosh <johnmci@ibm.net> wrote:
- > Jan Steinman wrote:
- > > Don't get me wrong, I'm one of the biggest ST fans around, but I wouldn't
- > > suggest it for serious number-crunching, unless you're doing infinite
- > > precision math...
- >
- > Jan, I think you didn't clarify that that in Smalltalk you have number
- > objects like:
- >
- > 9347592375907230957230945702397395729472947294757092374902388
-
- Well, I did just post a factorial method in another thread that
- outperforms C for cases "n > 13" but I guess that was too subtle!
- (Actually, I betrayed my age by suggesting C breaks for n! where n > 8,
- which is only true for 16 bit compilers.)
-
- BTW: I just accidentally typed "1000 factorial" when I meant "100
- factorial." It took several seconds to print several window's worth of
- digits, but I suspect that most of that time was spent rendering the
- digits onto the screen, NOT calculating them.
-
- : Jan Steinman <mailto:Jan@Bytesmiths.com>
- : Bytesmiths, the Smalltalk specialists <http://www.bytesmiths.com>
- : 2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068 USA +1 503 657 7703
-