3 ms·
Tcl was never lightweight. If you know how it works internally, you know that it consumes more memory and more processing time than most other scripting languag
by Nashenas 11y ago
Tcl was never lightweight. If you know how it works internally, you know that it consumes more memory and more processing time than most other scripting languages.
As an example, a few years back some coworkers and I were interviewing a candidate and he used a lookup take to avoid having to constantly calculate sin and cos. We wrote some tests to discover what the performance improvement was and found out there was none. It was slower to read a value out of an array than it was to calculate the sin or cos of a value.
Tcl might have been a good option back in the day, but they just don't keep up with everyone else, both in terms of performance and feature set.
- sigzero 11y ago> a few years back Have you even looked at it recently? Just curious.
- a8da6b0c91d 11y agoI would assume caching calls to sin/cos wouldn't be performant in any language, including C.
- wrenky 11y agoThats simply not true. Tcl was pretty heavy in the 90s, but its always been comparable to Perl, and slightly better than python. I would be EXTREMELY curious to see what TCL version you were running, and for what values of sin/cos. EDIT: Here is a benchmark that shows TCL/Lua both in a good light for hash table lookups. http://playcontrol.net/opensource/LuaHashMap/benchmarks.html http://playcontrol.net/opensource/LuaHashMap/benchmarks.html