Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

LISP slower than JAVA?

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-05 12:50

SBCL, the fastest LISP, is slower than Java.

Why do people say Java is bad because it's slow, but say LISP is the best programming language ever?

I don't get it.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-05 12:55

Java just has better compiler.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-05 13:08

lisp is 1-2 times slower than c, a pretty good result and significantly better than java which is like 10 times slower

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-05 13:15

Better tell me, why Lisp uses these retarded symbols, instead of using something like fixword (akin to fixnum) to hold strings? Because 64-bit register can hold 12-char string - that is any english or chinese word.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-05 13:20

>>4
I do imagine that languages like Lua or JS should execute much faster, because with perfect hashing method call would be just modulo vtable access and single comparison.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 10:43

>>3

lisp is 1-2 times slower than c, a pretty good result and significantly better than java which is like 10 times slower

[citation needed]

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 10:56

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:05

muh alioth benchmarks
``Cudder.''

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:10

I would say it's easier to optimise Lisp code than it is to optimise Java code. If you're taking benchmarks and comparing them, then note that you're comparing IMPLEMENTATIONS of languages.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:29

>>8
I recall they banned some Lisp code, because it used macros, which is considered cheating.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:32

Functional code is intuitively more inclined to optimisation than braindead "do this then this then this, oh and anything you do might have side effects" imperative code. The opposite is only true since more effort has been put into imperative language compilers because they are more popular because imperative programming it is easier to grasp for most (i.e. simple-minded) people than functional programming. The Von Neumann model of computing should never have survived past assembly language, or at most up to the point where they managed to bootstrap C successfully.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:33

>>10
Really? If they did, they must have relaxed the rule, because some programs sport some pretty hefty macros, e.g: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/program.php?test=fannkuchredux&lang=sbcl&id=4

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:34

>>11 Whoops s/ it / /

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 11:51

>>12
(declare (optimize (speed 3) (safety 0) (space 0) (debug 0)
CFLAGS JUST KICKED IN, YO!

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 12:19

>>11
except our brains don't work that way. at least mine doesn't

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 12:28

>>15
You sound comfortable in your limited paradigm. Perhaps you should try something else before resigning to “well I just work that way is all”. I find writing imperative code now feels like I am a child trying to write an essay on an etch-a-sketch with my hands taped together.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 12:33

>>16

Would you say learning one language from each paradigm is the best?

I already know C. Should I learn Haskell now?

>>7

So, SBCL is actually (in most situations) faster than Java? More or less, how much faster?

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 12:48

>>17
I am the exact opposite of you, I only know haskell and I am thinking on learning on C

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 12:53

Don't forget memory usage!

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 12:58

>>12
They should disable gc

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 14:05

>>16
Foul dwarf, begone to your vile reptile lord of parentheses

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 15:10

>>17
Learn as much as you can, so yeah, I suppose. It helps your brain be a better brain. Though mind the kopipe about Haskell that guy wrote.

>>21
oh no my precious syntax

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 15:41

Why do we need Java, when every PC runs x86? Just use some sandboxed executables.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 16:22

>>17
Not >>16, but ...
Would you say learning one language from each paradigm is the best?
I think it's a pretty good idea to learn to use at least the imperative, functional, and logic programming paradigms. You can still write practical code using only one of those paradigms, but I suppose it gives you different ways to think about problems.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 17:33

>>23
Hey Cudderberg, you forgot your tripcode.

Name: Anonymous 2013-03-06 20:38

I actually like the nickname ``Cudderberg'' a lot. I'll call her like that from now on.

Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List