3 ms·
SBCL is not as "high-level", especially when you are aiming for speed. Yossi already wrote about this http://www.yosefk.com/blog/the-high-level-cpu-challenge.ht
by critic 18y ago
SBCL is not as "high-level", especially when you are aiming for speed. Yossi already wrote about this http://www.yosefk.com/blog/the-high-level-cpu-challenge.html http://www.yosefk.com/blog/the-high-level-cpu-challenge.html , so there is no need for me to do it:
If you use Lisp’s static annotation
system, your code becomes uglier than
Java, and much less safe (I don’t think
Lisp does static checking of parameter
types, it just goes ahead and passes you
an object and lets you think it’s an integer).
Additionally, Lua only has "one data structure type" - that's also "higher-level" than what you have to do in Lisp, deciding among singly-linked lists, arrays, hash tables, binary trees, lexical trees, etc.
So while SBCL has its place, there's something about Lua you have to admire, don't you think?
- jbjohns 18y agoSBCL actually does a lot of inferred type checking when type declarations are present.