3 ms·
This is a poorly implemented benchmark. He's including the startup time of the jvm, he's not warming up the jvm, and he's not type hinting the clojure code. I
by jshen 16y ago
This is a poorly implemented benchmark. He's including the startup time of the jvm, he's not warming up the jvm, and he's not type hinting the clojure code.
I don't know node, so I don't know if he's making similar mistakes on that side.
- Swizec 16y agoI tried with type hinting the clojure code, it was slower. Startup time for the jvm seemed fair, because node has to start up as well. This should count into the overall time imho.
- gfodor 16y agoUh, if it's slower you should probably look into that.
- jshen 16y agoyou should calculate the time within clojure and node and output it. This will take away the startup time. You should also warm up the jvm. I may play with the type hints tonight if I get time. It shouldn't make it slower.
- oskarkv 16y agoHow did you add the type hints?
- realgt 16y agonode has no jvm, node starts up in milliseconds. node _is_ faster
- UncleOxidant 16y ago...to start up anyway.
- jshen 16y agowhich is unimportant to a large class of apps.
- runevault 16y agoFor most anything server based (which is how I would use Node if I were to pick it up) startup time should not matter because the server just remains running... making that comparison pointless at best and disingenuous at worst.