At 05:51 PM 04/26/2001, Peter Seebach wrote:
>In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dennis writes:
> >Don't try to argue this ridiculous point on this list. You are badly
> >overmatched. You are so wrong that its not worthy of debate.
>
>Which is presumably why you offered no arguments.
>
>Actually, this is a fairly well-demonstrated result. Anything that depends
>mostly on the operation of, say, regexp code, and doesn't spend most of its
>time doing flow control will be fairly comparable in C and perl. Slower?
>Quite possibly. *much* slower? Not normally. I think the standing estimate
>is that competently-written perl will take no more than three times as long as
>carefully-written C for most perl-ish tasks. Matrix multiplies are an obvious
>exception.
>
>In practice, perl is likely to beat C substantially on most
>exrpession-matching code, because most C programmers write very inefficient
>matching code, and perl is good at it.
>
>(Go ahead, dismiss me as being unfairly biased against C.)
Done. Like I said, its not worthy of debate.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
