Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 08:50:13 08/13/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 13, 2004 at 09:53:29, Russell Reagan wrote: >On August 13, 2004 at 05:10:59, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>No, you can't. C is the language closest to assembly level, and so can be beaten >>only by assembly code. > >Just like I said, you define C to be faster, and then "prove" that it is faster. >Begging the question, a logical fallacy. > >You say C can only be beaten by assembly code. Never heard of Fortran? How about >OCaml? Are you that closed minded that you can't see how another language could >make guarentees that would allow the code to be optimized better than a C >program? > >>Java on the other hand doesn't compile to native machine >>code, and uses bytecode instead, so it cannot be possiby faster than C. > >In theory, JIT compilers can produce faster code because they have more >information to use at runtime. Maybe it will never happen in practice, but your >statement that it "it cannot be possiby faster than C" is clearly not >theoretically true, because it is "possible". There are Fortran -> C compilers. There are C++ -> C compilers. I'm fairly sure there are ML -> C compilers. So worst case, you can generate C code that is just as fast as ML. anthony
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.