felix winkelmann wrote:
On 8/30/06, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, in other words, Felix tried the benchmarks pointed
to by Sven and found Chicken to be lacking... :) ?
No, not at all. Chicken's performance is just fine. I just
refuse to burn time and energy for things that are not
broken, or things that will never be quite satisfactory for
everybody, regardless how one tries.
I definitely agree about priorities. Benchmarks are synthetic
priorities, useful only if they increase the marketing presence of the
product. Between "it's fast" and "it works on Windows," I know what's
currently more important for marketing.
For performance and numerical simulations, I found
pure Chicken unsatisfactory. Mixing in some C made it
better, but that quickly becomes limiting. Another
good option (for me) was to use OCAML with a Scheme
interpreter on top (OCS).
That's quite correct. Put metaprogramming facilities (a bit
like the stuff Will does) is IMHO the way to go.
Well, *my* philosophy is that Chicken is a BSD licensed open source
project, that I can jolly well add performance optimizations to, if I
ever get around to that. But I'm still working on infrastructure and I
agree it comes first. It's worth noting that I picked Chicken for
performance reasons once upon a time. At least, it did decently in the
Shootout. It's not as fast as Bigloo, but it has a larger community and
C++ support that Bigloo lacks. Bigloo has the the trick of supporting
C, Java, and C#, though. I don't happen to be interested in Java and
C#, though. Finally, Chicken is BSD and Bigloo is GPL. So if I get
deep into compiler optimization at some point, I'm not "losing my work
to the open source world." I could in principle use it as a basis for
my own compiler or programming language someday, and decide what I want
to do with it commercially.
Cheers,
Brandon Van Every
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
