RB clear winner in speed test

[Richard Gaskin]

Brian Yennie wrote:
> Chris,
> 
> To be fair- the 3-word optimization was pointed out more than once on 
> the list and you never indicated that it was a problem- we assumed the 
> sample data had become realistic.
> 
> So you gotta give Rev a better shake than to consider the "final" 
> benchmark as running 3-word optimized code on 3-7 word data!

He will.  Any reasonable evaluation will encompass more than just raw 
speed on a single algorithm, esp. with the results so close and Rev's 
performance certainly well within an acceptable range.  Factoring in 
productivity and, in Chris' case, experience with xTalk, the choice will 
become evident.

Rev doesn't claim to be the fastest language on the planet.  Like I said 
before, if raw speed is a critical factor and 3GLs aren't a bore one 
would get far better performance and have more tools and examples to 
draw from  using the industry standard, C (an in many cases fewer lines 
of code than BASIC).

And adopting that standard for that one critical algorithm won't 
encumber the other 90% of development with a compile-runtime cycle, 
tedious memory management, and other bit-counting exercises so often 
done better by machines.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com