3 ms·
It's a gigantic stretch to read an article that benchmarks languages implementing a single type of function and conclude "It shows Scala to be faster compared t
by brown9-2 15y ago
It's a gigantic stretch to read an article that benchmarks languages implementing a single type of function and conclude "It shows Scala to be faster compared to Java".
Thankfully the author realizes this in his conclusion - "it seems that difference in implementations is the cause for difference in the time taken by Java/Scala programs".
- eru 15y agoHe could probably try to justify: Scala idioms to structure code tend to be faster than Java idioms.
- eevilspock 15y agoOr argue that the Scala language provides more information to the static compiler allowing it to produce better byte code. Has anyone done that analysis?
- cb372 15y agoIn general, the Java static compiler generates pretty poor-performing bytecode, no matter how much useful info you give it. This is by design, and relies on HotSpot to provide the necessary optimisations at runtime. I'm no expert but I would assume that the Scala compiler is quite similar. Not much point in generating highly optimised bytecode when HotSpot will do the job for you.