Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java,comp.lang.functional,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!newsflash.concordia.ca!news.nstn.ca!ott.istar!istar.net!van.istar!west.istar!n1van.istar!van-bc!nntp.portal.ca!news.bc.net!info.ucla.edu!agate!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-res.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!nagle
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Three languages: A performance comparison
Message-ID: <nagleDv9L85.9JL@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <4te7rg$287o@piglet.cc.uic.edu>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 17:43:17 GMT
Lines: 21
Sender: nagle@netcom11.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.java.programmer:2337 comp.lang.java:71897 comp.lang.functional:7638 comp.lang.misc:26346 comp.lang.smalltalk:41473 comp.lang.c:198699 comp.lang.c++:202653

dhanle2@icarus.cc.uic.edu (David James Hanley) writes:
>	The program caries out some basic arithmetic operations
>with a datatype that manipulates arbitrarily large integers.
>I used this example because it is of interest to me, for a project
>that I am working on.  Different benchmarks will of course yeild 
>different results.

     If you look at the code, it's clear that this program is dominated
by storage allocation overhead.  What you're really seeing is how
fast new/delete or a GC works.

     Also, if you're testing something with garbage collection, you need
to make sure the benchmark runs long enough that GC actually takes place.

     I'd like to see some of the standard numerical benchmarks run on
the same compilers.  Has anyone benchmarked Symantec's new JIT Java
compiler against Visual C++ on, say, the Livermore Loops or another
widely accepted number-crunching benchmark?  I have a current need for
this info.

					John Nagle
