Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 04:51:23 02/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2004 at 16:26:35, Russell Reagan wrote: >On February 16, 2004 at 16:03:46, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>I am guessing that Lisp will have the approximate overhead of Java or VB.NET. >>Hence, you will have a factor of 4 handicap. > >Unless you use a lisp-to-c compiler, of course. The point of Lisp-to-C compilers is portability, not performance. Performance-wise, compiling to C does not offer any advantage compared to compiling to assembly language. I don't see any technical reasons why Java should be inherently slower than Lisp, but my experience is that it is. The reason is probably just a difference in the quality of compilers. I am sure there are some really good optimizing Java compilers out there, but I have never used one (nor a Java program compiled with one). I have no comments about VB.NET, for the simple reason that I have never even heard about it before. Tord
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.