>>>>> "m" == matt <matthew.leonha...@gmail.com> writes:
>> One should note that there's also the overhead of the bash loop here. m> Valid, but I considered it to be irrelevant as both executables were m> subjected to the same loop. did you read my comments on your 'benchmark'? the fork/exec overhead is large and not irrelevent. and perl's compile time is also in there. all of that and more hides anything to do with checking 1 + 1. as i said, benchmarking is much trickier than you seem to think it is. you must isolate the code under test and properly compare it. and aiming for 1 + 1 as a lang speed comparison is also extremely wrong. real world code is much more important to compare. uri -- Uri Guttman ------ u...@stemsystems.com -------- http://www.sysarch.com -- ----- Perl Code Review , Architecture, Development, Training, Support ------ --------- Gourmet Hot Cocoa Mix ---- http://bestfriendscocoa.com --------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: beginners-unsubscr...@perl.org For additional commands, e-mail: beginners-h...@perl.org http://learn.perl.org/
