Re: "Standard ML, Scheme, or C"

• Subject: Re: "Standard ML, Scheme, or C"
• From: jhr@research.att.com (John Reppy)
• Date: Mon, 18 Nov 91 09:12:41 EST
• Cc: types@theory.lcs.mit.edu
• Sender: meyer@theory.lcs.mit.edu

Date: Mon, 18 Nov 91 09:07 EST
To: beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU

> From alice!cs.cornell.edu!types-dist-request Sun Nov 17 12:11:20 1991
> 
> Date: Sun, 17 Nov 91 06:08:12 -0800
> 
> >> this is not meant to inspire a debate about benchmarks...
> but if I am not mistake, C is an order of magnitude faster than the 
> other two languages mentioned in the same breath there. 
> 
> 

Actually a factor of 2 is more accurate.  In fact, for heavily symbolic
codes, SML and Scheme are probably faster.

  - John

• Prev: Re: Why Prolog and CBV?
• Next: Why Prolog and CBV?
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread