Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:57:08 02/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2004 at 23:45:55, Russell Reagan wrote: >On February 17, 2004 at 19:44:35, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>When not referring to API, you have no idea what you talk about. 10%. Make that >>100% to start with. Those open source things are horribly programmed, without a single exception. >Here's what I did. I took several open source chess programs and compiled them >under native C/C++, and then under managed C/C++, and the results were that the >biggest difference was about 20% for TSCP. The rest were much closer, less than >10% slower, and one was actually faster when compiled as managed C++. So what >tests did you do? > >Since all of the .NET languages get compiled to native machine code, I see no >reason why C# should be 100% slower just because it's C#. There are plenty of >benchmarks that show C# to be fairly close to the speed of native C/C++, and the Compare with a PGO'd C compile of a commercial program. C# is intended especially for interface programming and there definitely is a need for a language doing this. I see it as the microsoft proprietery counterpart of JAVA. A company doesn't choose for JAVA because it is fast. When we choose JAVA for a small project that was because it was supposed to work multiplatform. It's easy for Sun hardware to use (thanks to superior java compilers/interpreters there) and the cpu load is not relevant; basically harddisk speeds and network communication speeds and latencies are the only problem in these worlds. When speaking about interface, there still is a lot of possibilities there for new products/programming languages which can build you good environments. C# is not an exception to that. >gap should only narrow as newer compilers and newer versions of the languages >arrive. > >There are plenty of benchmarks on the net that show C# to be within a few >percent of natively compiled C++ already. There are a few areas that need some >work, but it won't be long, and C# will be within a few percent of C++. Again you do it. Comparing slow object allocating c++ code is never a good compare to anything. It's a zillion times slower of course than non object allocating C code. Now compare with good c++ code, which we use for the diep interface by the way. You aren't going to beat that *anyhow* with C# within 3 years of time.
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.