3 ms·
> Language != Implementation Ideally, yes. But in practice a language and its implementation (whichever one you choose) is a tool. If you're comparing tools, y
by enneff 14y ago
> Language != Implementation
Ideally, yes. But in practice a language and its implementation (whichever one you choose) is a tool. If you're comparing tools, you've got to compare a language with its implementation.
- pjmlp 14y agoSo what you compare when a language happens to have multiple implementations? Which from 6g, gogcc, go express you pick for Go? Which from OpenJDK, Oracle JVM, IBM J9, gcj, RoboVM, Aonix Perc ... you pick for Java? Which from Sun Forte, IBM xlc, hpcc, gcc, clang, CINT, Visual C++, ... you pick for C or C++? Which from CPython, IronPython, PyPy, JPython, ... you pick for Python?
- enneff 14y agoIt depends what you're trying to compare.
- pjmlp 14y agoIt is always up to the present to use the evidence that better fulfills its goals in the eyes of others.
- coldtea 14y agoThat's easy. Except for C++, which is a multi-vendor language. For all others there is a definitive, used in the overwhelming majority of cases, implementation: Go: 6g Java: Oracle JVM Python: CPython Ruby: Matz's Haskell: GHC ...
- pjmlp 14y agoExcept that in many cases, e.g. Python, the canonical implementation is not the fastest one. So of course, the presenter will carefully select the best implementation to prove his arguments, even if there are others available that contradict him/her.