> Why are you characterising that as “a programming contest”? Because it was? Do you have a better way to repeatedly test performance? And yes, the study's i

> Why are you characterising that as “a programming contest”? Because it was? Do you have a better way to repeatedly test performance? And yes, the study's intent was to look at performance, not productivity. It's even right in the title. Not sure where you dreamed up the latter.