home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: ix.netcom.com!netnews
- From: Ed Young <tegy@ix.netcom.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.tcl,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.java
- Subject: Re: Relative Speed of Perl vs. Tcl vs. C
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 23:10:59 -0500
- Organization: Netcom
- Message-ID: <31045FD3.1625@ix.netcom.com>
- References: <4dhuoj$cbe@shellx.best.com> <9602122.8425@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
- <4dudsf$187@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <ukvim4pceu.fsf@linda.teleport.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-wil-del1-02.ix.netcom.com
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-NETCOM-Date: Mon Jan 22 8:11:19 PM PST 1996
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b5 (Win95; I)
-
- Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
- >
- > >>>>> "Tim" == Tim Hollebeek <tim@franck> writes:
- >
- > Tim> An important point, though, is that all 'reasonably' written C programs
- > Tim> will run within a factor of 2 or so of 'about as fast as you can get,
- > Tim> while for some problems, Perl won't be able to break through about a
- > Tim> factor of 7 or so, even if you are a Perl expert.
- >
- > I just want to point out to everyone that you are simply making that
- > figure up based on what you think Perl is doing internally.
- >
- > Tom Christiansen has had a long-standing bet that someone can't give
- > him a program in C that he can't make run no more than "e" times
- > slower (about 2.8 for you non-math-geeks) in Perl. So far, no one's
- > done it.
- >
- > That's also been my experience as well. Perl is *not* slow. In fact,
- > a Perl-written egrep is *faster* than most vendor's egrep, for
- > example.
- >
- > So, if you have a number of "7-times-slower" programs, post'em, and I
- > bet we can easily boost their speed by two or three times.
- >
- > ObDisclaimer: Yes, I know a few things about Perl. :-)
- > --How about diff? ...
-