Le 16 janv. 07 à 11:27, Daniel McBrearty a écrit :
Fair enough. So why not try to design a benchmark in such a way that those techniques can be exploited? What is the simplest set of tests that has some meaning for you?
I don't know :) I'm thinking benchmarking simple things don't work. Pushing this a bit further, I realized I didn't really care about speed as long as the apps are resonably fast. I don't really care if a framework gives me 150 hits/s and another one 130. Maybe what matters in the end is the resources you have to allocate (financially speaking, which implies how many servers, elcetricity, developer time, etc) to a given project. This implies observing the projects on the long term, and encompasses such concerns as application lifecycle, security (how much did the downtime to plug that hole cost us ?), extensibility, developer turnover ("Bye boss, had enough of your php toys"), etc. Don't you think ?
I don't know of anyone wishing to write the same app twice, or a client willing to pay two teams of developers to produce the same app in two different languages, so I guess the comparison cannot be done :)
Am I a would-be suit -or moron, pick one ? Of course it would be nice to say : Catalyst is the best AND fastest framework there is. But IMHO it's not that important (considering establishing such a fact is nearly impossible). I'm pretty satisfied with the fact that I can use the whole of CPAN at great speed, and I think that matters more.
David Morel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----------------------------------- OpenPGP pubkey : http://www.amakuru.net/dmorel.asc _______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
