Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.sprintlink.net!simtel!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!cs.mu.OZ.AU!munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU!fjh
From: fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson)
Subject: Re: speed of prolog
Message-ID: <9514916.11982@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
Sender: news@cs.mu.OZ.AU (CS-Usenet)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
References: <3pam2e$9jh@chuangtsu.acns.carleton.edu> <3pptgj$6do@percy.cs.bham.ac.uk> <D90wt4.32n@cee.hw.ac.uk> <9514714.11493@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <9514909.20364@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 06:59:47 GMT
Lines: 25

conway@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Thomas Charles CONWAY) writes:

>fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) writes:
>
>>If there are any tasks where Prolog can out-perform C or C++,
>>they are *very* few and far between.  I challenge anyone to
>>produce such a Prolog program.  I am very confident that I
>>could write a C/C++ program with equal or better performance.
>
>Sure, but in equal or better programming time?

Maybe, maybe not - so?
This discussion is about the speed of programs written in Prolog,
not about how long it takes to write them.

Certainly efficiency is only one of the many factors which must
be considered when selecting a language.  In most cases, efficiency
should not weigh highly on the scale of relative importance.
But in the cases where it does, C/C++ will probably be a better
choice than Prolog.

-- 
Fergus Henderson
fjh@cs.mu.oz.au
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh
