> Benchmarks are about finding representative results across a variety of tasks. > And you can construct cases where the JVM is infinitely faster than C/C++/Ru

> Benchmarks are about finding representative results across a variety of tasks. > And you can construct cases where the JVM is infinitely faster than C/C++/Rust, because the JIT optimizes through a virtual call and detects dead code. How would that be a "representative result across a variety of tasks" according to your own definition of a benchmark? What do you mean by "across a variety of tasks"? That sounds like taking the average of some metric for different benchmarks, I'm not sure that is a good idea. I think it makes more sense to benchmark your specific use case, which is what I meant by "it depends". > If you think there are good benchmarks that show these languages are 10x slower in realistic cases, then you should share them, rather than just asserting that they're out there. I never said anything about "realistic" and "good", but they are really not unthinkably hard to find: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/binarytrees.html http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/binarytrees.htm...