Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Languages revisited. Functional language beats C for number cruncing

Author: Dave Gomboc

Date: 03:36:23 01/11/03

Go up one level in this thread


On January 10, 2003 at 08:01:45, Dan Andersson wrote:

>A couple of postings on comp.lang.scheme implemented the CoyoteGulch benchmarks
>in Scheme. And lo and behold BigLoo produced faster code for the numerical
>benchmark. One might object that since BigLoo emits C or Java bytecode it isn't
>really faster. But the amount of automated program transformations that are
>applied is huge. For a coder to do the same thing would be like trying to
>outperform a spreadsheet. And the C code is inhuman in nature. And the question
>arises: Why on earth would one use C++ or Java? Both are verbose and terribly
>low level compared to lambda calculus.
>
>MvH Dan Andersson

This is no big deal.  FFTW (fastest fourier transform in the west) is also
written in a functional language.  (It generates C code.)

As far as I am concerned, they might as well have written it in the functional
language known as compile-time C++. ;-)

Dave




This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.