On 12/4/13 7:41 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 December 2013 at 15:02:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
On 04/12/13 13:49, Atila Neves wrote:
So, D was faster than the other contenders by far in throughput, 2nd
place
losing to the C implementation on latency. I'm still not sure why
that is.
Profiling in this case is tricky. I'm pretty sure the profiler is
still ticking
away when a fiber yields - the top function is the one that reads
from the
network, which I can't do much about.
What about the relative elegance/maintainability/ease of comprehension
of the different solutions? Playing devil's advocate for a moment, I
can well understand if a preference for one language over another was
decided on the basis of its performance being good _enough_ and the
code being really easy to work with, rather than simply the best
performer.
I can't read Erlang (yet) so I don't know about that one. The C code
is... well C code so not great. I have a profound dislike for Go but I'd
say the Go and D implementations are just as readable. Then again, I
wrote the D code so if I didn't think that was readable... :P
How do they compare in lines of code?
Andrei
