The testing decisions feel very arbitrary. If he really wants to show that Java is better than C++, he must give C++ every opportunity to do better, then show

The testing decisions feel very arbitrary. If he really wants to show that Java is better than C++, he must give C++ every opportunity to do better, then show that Java does even better despite this. The correct optimization flag to use is the one that gives C++ the best performance, not whichever he felt like using. Likewise for the choice of benchmarks: he should use the version of the C++ benchmark that runs the fastest, and he should have a C++ expert fix the broken benchmarks. Otherwise the only conclusion that can be drawn is: "Java experts are better at tuning Java programs than C++ programs". While he's at it, he can try the new Shootout benchmarks, which clearly show C++ in the lead, even when using his vaunted "-server" flag: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=java&lang2=gpp http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all... ...How old is this, anyway? There's no date in the article, but he's running gcc 3.3.1 and Java 1.4.2 on Fedora Test1, on a Pentium 4 laptop. The version of gcc places it in 2003, so I'd place more confidence the newer Shootout results.