X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Virus-Scanned:	amavisd-new at neurotica.com
X-NSA-prism-xkeyscore:	I do not consent to surveillance, prick
X-Original-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=neurotica.com;
	s=default; t=1436301569;
	bh=yfHZ4T3MbS8oxFqyJgI2kANSyWd1djBElL4tpTNXbkg=;
	h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To;
	b=icH0Kyqs/CLiLe+39VMADQv55k8MQvNy54GHMnO2nuRgH5+fpQxqry2lgHym4YlnR
	W16yz4CFAhQ2rxAdbSJrWrnGPq9mNLoem4bGk9tAqbnuaTZ1rm4lWp2K0cD40jKmsp
	zOuEjcr99i9d8zH/ddPE/ZrYi4KG706ocNtSvvWM=
Message-ID:	<559C3901.9090205@neurotica.com>
Date:	Tue, 07 Jul 2015 16:39:29 -0400
From:	"Dave McGuire (mcguire AT neurotica DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] gEDA/gschem still alive?
References:	<1435510363 DOT 682 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <20150703030409 DOT 32398 DOT qmail AT stuge DOT se> <CAFC5WMoa2-z6bNca_bQN+jmMR260UBmoJQybUzH=L2TrBpzNNA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <1436006726 DOT 677 DOT 13 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <20150706200609 DOT GD24178 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <CAC4O8c9f0pLsLu_dyuO5ggh7RmHY1vAA=UUhk9AE0JYZb4mhBQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAM2RGhQfPO31-1Uyc3kC7w286r0VD7c41UZEZcyYquzknCxbsQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20150707060409 DOT GB14357 AT localhost DOT localdomain> <CAOP4iL2C_LU=RQy5FWYF-7RrHW6tqhqqyFJGjkwLQ2AD7FiYJA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <1436287952 DOT 678 DOT 26 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <559C0F7E DOT 7010009 AT neurotica DOT com> <1436295556 DOT 678 DOT 91 DOT camel AT ssalewski DOT de> <E90F2D99-6421-4D1A-BF28-73992A21BA1F AT icloud DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<E90F2D99-6421-4D1A-BF28-73992A21BA1F@icloud.com>
X-MIME-Autoconverted:	from quoted-printable to 8bit by delorie.com id t67Ke0qR009123
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

On 07/07/2015 03:38 PM, Chris Smith (space DOT dandy AT icloud DOT com) [via
geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
>> The new languages are fast! Very fast! I have seen many benchmarks,
>> micro and real life. D, Rust, Nim are very close to C generally. There
>> may be a few exceptions, but generally that can be fixed with minimal
>> rewriting of the code. And Crystal and Julia are really fast although.
>> Go is generally a bit slower. Even Java is very very fast today, but is
>> limited by the startup time for the VM of course. 
> 
> Is it really that those languages have become faster, or is it simply that the advances in CPU processing power means that the differences between them are drowned out by other bottlenecks, like IO? I wonder if you'd get similar results if these languages were benchmarked on a 486?

  If all developers were forced to test their code on very slow
machines, the world would be a much happier place.  Yet another reason
why I moved from server-side development entirely into embedded
firmware, where code performance still matters.

              -Dave

-- 
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA

- Raw text -