3 ms·

I was referring more to their startup time. The runtime introduces delay when you type in the script command on a CLI. Regardless of that, the factor-of-two-or

I was referring more to their startup time. The runtime introduces delay when you type in the script command on a CLI. Regardless of that, the factor-of-two-or-sometimes-faster argument sounds a little far-fetched for me, care to provide some sources on the benchmarks? Not saying it's not true, I'm just not accustomed to seeing highly extensible and dynamically-typed languages such as Common Lisp perform so fast.

PackageUpgrades 11y ago
sbcl is fast, and can be really fast. Especially compared to the other cl implementations.
dmm 11y ago
Check out the benchmark game for some decent benchmarks of various languages. Here's sbcl vs gcc c: https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=sbcl&lang2=gcc&data=u64q https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?... On several benchmarks sbcl is less than three times slower than c. And I never noticed a startup delay with sbcl. Let's do a simple test. $ echo 'print("hello")' > test.py $ echo '(format t "hello")' > test.lisp $ time python test.py hello real 0m0.033s # 33ms user 0m0.027s sys 0m0.003s $ time sbcl --script test.lisp hello real 0m0.006s # 6ms user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.003s # I couldn't figure out how to run newlisp w/o starting # the interactive interp so I'll give it a string $ time newlisp -e '(print "hello")' hello"hello" real 0m0.002s # 2ms user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.000s So sbcl starts up about 5 times faster than python, which lots of people use for scripting. newlisp seems to startup about 4ms faster than sbcl. I really don't see a scenario where the startup time of sbcl is a problem. Just for fun let's look at java. $ java -version openjdk version "1.8.0_60" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_60-b24) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.60-b23, mixed mode) $ time javac hello.java real 0m0.386s # ouch user 0m0.910s sys 0m0.040s $ time java hello hello real 0m0.066s # 66ms, once compiled user 0m0.067s sys 0m0.007s

PackageUpgrades 11y ago

sbcl is fast, and can be really fast. Especially compared to the other cl implementations.

dmm 11y ago

Check out the benchmark game for some decent benchmarks of various languages. Here's sbcl vs gcc c: https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=sbcl&lang2=gcc&data=u64q https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?... On several benchmarks sbcl is less than three times slower than c. And I never noticed a startup delay with sbcl. Let's do a simple test. $ echo 'print("hello")' > test.py $ echo '(format t "hello")' > test.lisp $ time python test.py hello real 0m0.033s # 33ms user 0m0.027s sys 0m0.003s $ time sbcl --script test.lisp hello real 0m0.006s # 6ms user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.003s # I couldn't figure out how to run newlisp w/o starting # the interactive interp so I'll give it a string $ time newlisp -e '(print "hello")' hello"hello" real 0m0.002s # 2ms user 0m0.000s sys 0m0.000s So sbcl starts up about 5 times faster than python, which lots of people use for scripting. newlisp seems to startup about 4ms faster than sbcl. I really don't see a scenario where the startup time of sbcl is a problem. Just for fun let's look at java. $ java -version openjdk version "1.8.0_60" OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_60-b24) OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.60-b23, mixed mode) $ time javac hello.java real 0m0.386s # ouch user 0m0.910s sys 0m0.040s $ time java hello hello real 0m0.066s # 66ms, once compiled user 0m0.067s sys 0m0.007s