>You (or the papers) are comparing different implementations of programs in different languages. Fyi... the 2nd paper is using the same language of Java. It j

>You (or the papers) are comparing different implementations of programs in different languages. Fyi... the 2nd paper is using the same language of Java. It just compares different allocation strategies: explicit vs GC. (I think that paper is written in a confusing way.) My original point back to op (rwmj) was that the computer scientists were quite aware that malloc had a non-zero cost. And pointing that out really doesn't challenge the paper's findings.