> In a couple benchmarks Java would probably be faster… Please be specific. JMH timing for that spectral-norm program was 0.175s to 0.283s faster than the 4.2

> In a couple benchmarks Java would probably be faster… Please be specific. JMH timing for that spectral-norm program was 0.175s to 0.283s faster than the 4.29s elapsed time (16s cpu time). That's not 10-20% it's 6.6%. At best that might put the best Java spectral-norm program a little faster than the best Haskell program. At best that might mean the best Java spectral-norm program took 2x (twice as long as) the best C++ program. https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/q6600/performance/spectralnorm.html https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/... > … would probably be faster… Please take those tiny tiny programs and JMH and make your own measurements — you might believe measurements you make yourself.