This paper:

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/hqkwk/google_paper_comparing_performance_of_c_java/

compares the efficiency of an algorithm implemented in C++, Scala, Java, and Go. I wonder how D would fare. Does anyone have the time and inclination to port the benchmark so we can take a look?


Thanks,

Andrei

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> This paper:
>
>
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/hqkwk/google_paper_comparing_performance_of_c_java/
>
> compares the efficiency of an algorithm implemented in C++, Scala, Java, and Go. I wonder how D would fare. Does anyone have the time and inclination to port the benchmark so we can take a look?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrei

OK. I'll start right away.

Timon

Timon Gehr:

> OK. I'll start right away.

I have independently started it too :-)
But this article written by Google and its benchmarking methodology are not good.

Bye,
bearophile

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote in message news:isbd1j$1u9s$1@digitalmars.com...
>
> But this article written by Google and its benchmarking methodology are not good.
>

I realize you'e probably talking about content, but...Pet Peeve: Trying to read a paged multi-column layout outside of dead-tree form.

bearophile wrote:
> Timon Gehr:
>
>> OK. I'll start right away.
>
> I have independently started it too :-)
> But this article written by Google and its benchmarking methodology are not good.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

Ok, we can compare the two implementations afterwards. BTW, have you already noticed how incredibly stupid some parts of the implementation of cpp are?

I think I will also do a d_pro version after porting cpp.

Timon

On 6/3/11 2:48 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Timon Gehr:
>>
>>> OK. I'll start right away.
>>
>> I have independently started it too :-)
>> But this article written by Google and its benchmarking methodology are not good.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> Ok, we can compare the two implementations afterwards. BTW, have you already
> noticed how incredibly stupid some parts of the implementation of cpp are?
>
> I think I will also do a d_pro version after porting cpp.
>
> Timon

Terrific, thanks! I think this will be very instructive.

Andrei

On 6/3/11 2:48 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Timon Gehr:
>>
>>> OK. I'll start right away.
>>
>> I have independently started it too :-)
>> But this article written by Google and its benchmarking methodology are not good.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> Ok, we can compare the two implementations afterwards. BTW, have you already
> noticed how incredibly stupid some parts of the implementation of cpp are?
>
> I think I will also do a d_pro version after porting cpp.
>
> Timon

One note - some of their std::list uses can be replaced by SList, and others by built-in arrays.

Andrei

Speaking of SList, for some reason std_slist.html is still distributed with DMD.

Andrei Alexandresco wrote:
> On 6/3/11 2:48 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> bearophile wrote:
>>> Timon Gehr:
>>>
>>>> OK. I'll start right away.
>>>
>>> I have independently started it too :-)
>>> But this article written by Google and its benchmarking methodology are not good.
>>>
>>> Bye,
>>> bearophile
>>
>> Ok, we can compare the two implementations afterwards. BTW, have you already noticed how incredibly stupid some parts of the implementation of cpp are?
>>
>> I think I will also do a d_pro version after porting cpp.
>>
>> Timon
>
> One note - some of their std::list uses can be replaced by SList, and others by built-in arrays.
>
> Andrei

Yes, but built-in arrays are more similar to std::vector, therefore it might
already be an optimization over the original benchmark. I'm not sure if that is okay?

Timon

On 6/3/11, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:
> Speaking of SList, for some reason std_slist.html is still distributed with DMD.
>
I've filed it (and many more):
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6101