3 ms·
> the paper ignores the reason why people kicked and screamed for the functionality to begin with No it doesn't. The explicitly talk about this in section 7: "
by taylorfausak 11y ago
> the paper ignores the reason why people kicked and screamed for the functionality to begin with
No it doesn't. The explicitly talk about this in section 7: "The acceptance of Typed Racket in the commercial and open-source Racket community suggests that (some) programmers find a way around the performance bottlenecks of sound gradual typing."
> Reticulated Python is still an order of magnitude faster than Ruby
Are you suggesting that a slower variant of Python is ten times faster than Ruby? That doesn't match my experience. For what it's worth, Ruby outperforms Python in some benchmarks: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/ruby.html http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/ruby.html
- Veedrac 11y agoLooking at the first benchmark in the list you gave, just in-lining eval_A in the Python code (as the Ruby code does) makes the Python code competitive with the Ruby. As usual, don't trust the Benchmarks Game; it's not nearly well enough controlled to be a useful data point. (I do agree with your main point, though. CPython ain't that fast.)
- igouy 11y agoAs usual, don't trust Joshua Landau: without in-lining eval-A the Ruby code only slows from 102secs to 137secs. As usual, Joshua -- Do the ordinary thing and report specific programs that you think should not be allowed.
- Veedrac 11y agoFor those not aware, igouy maintains the Benchmarks Game.
- igouy 11y agoNothing hidden about that -- http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/sometimes-people-just-make-up-stuff.html#history http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/sometimes-people-jus... How to report specific programs that you think should not be allowed -- http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html#invalid http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/play.html#invalid