>>13
Whats so stupid about that? You don't use some "Abstract Language" you use GCC
Then it isn't a multi-language benchmark. It's a multi-implementation benchmark; completely different. A true language benchmark would, in some ideal world, analyze all properties of the formal language specification and compute some ordinal speed properties for it.
It took many years to be competitive with C++ with many thousands of person-hours poured over optimizing and extending the JVM. It isn't as trivial as it seems.
No, it's not. The very idea that an interpreted/JIT'd language can be faster than the language hosting it is paradoxical. Regardless of how trivial it is to implement Java in C, you can never say that Java is faster than C.
The shooout forbids assembly, but why a language should be "not faster" just because some scripter thinks its "Unfair, TOO FAST!" or "You CAN'T copy my code"?
You are reinforcing what I said; is English not your native language?