[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl
From: |
Alan Post |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl |
Date: |
Mon, 19 Sep 2011 21:27:23 -0600 |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 02:11:41PM +0200, Sascha Ziemann wrote:
> The Perl version takes for my test tree about two seconds:
>
> real 0m1.810s
> user 0m1.664s
> sys 0m0.140s
>
[snip]
>
> And now hold on tight! It takes more than one minute for the same data:
>
> real 1m16.540s
> user 1m14.849s
> sys 0m0.664s
>
> And there is almost no significant performance boost by compiling it:
>
> real 0m1.810s
> user 0m1.664s
> sys 0m0.140s
>
It looks like you have a copy-and-paste error here? It would appear
that compiling the code makes it precisely as fast as perl. ;-)
-Alan
--
.i ma'a lo bradi cu penmi gi'e du
- [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl, Sascha Ziemann, 2011/09/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl, Peter Bex, 2011/09/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl, Christian Kellermann, 2011/09/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl, Peter Bex, 2011/09/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl,
Alan Post <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl, Daishi Kato, 2011/09/20
- Re: [Chicken-users] Chicken vs Perl, Felix, 2011/09/20