3 ms·
Very interesting. My two cents: because the stacked bars for php, ruby, perl and py:cpy, it's impossible to compare the other languages in that first chart. All
by airstrike 3y ago
Very interesting. My two cents: because the stacked bars for php, ruby, perl and py:cpy, it's impossible to compare the other languages in that first chart. All the chart says is that the benchmark is much slower in those 4 languages relative to "all other languages we tested".
It would be nice to see those other languages in a chart that doesn't include the slower four. Alternatively, you could also show those slower four with "broken" columns like this https://peltiertech.com/broken-y-axis-in-excel-chart/ https://peltiertech.com/broken-y-axis-in-excel-chart/
- tmtvl 3y agoThe second chart is basically the first chart with the slow 4 removed (well, not removed but at such a scale that they're irrelevant).
- airstrike 3y agoAh, duh, I see that now. That's what I get for commenting too quickly ;-) The choice of stacked bar charts is also strange because the languages are not all comparable > Every language has nqueen and matmul implementations. Some languages do not have sudoku or bedcov implementations. In addition, I implemented most algorithms in plb2 and adapted a few contributed matmul and sudoku implementations in plb. As I am mostly a C programmer, implementations in other languages may be suboptimal and there are no implementations in functional languages. Pull requests are welcomed! So the point still stands that many charts doing one thing each would be better than fewer charts doing many things each
- igouy 3y ago> many charts doing one thing each Would not be a summary.