On Tuesday 16 June 2009 23:50:45 Richard O'Keefe wrote: > I've now done some benchmarks myself in C, Java, and Smalltalk, > comparing "imperative" versions of leftist heaps with "functional" ones. > For what it's worth, on a 2.16GHz Intel Core 2 Duo Mac, the > coefficient in front of the log(n) part was > > C Java ST(A) ST(B) > "Imperative" 40 70 150 1123 > "Functional" 240 126 290 1895 > > where ST(A) was a native-code Smalltalk and ST(B) a byte-code one. > The C/Functional case used the Boehm collector, untuned. > Times are in nanoseconds. Values of n ranged from 2 to 100; the > correspondent was saying that small sizes were important. > > It seems that a factor of 2 for *this* problem is credible; > a factor of 10 is not.
And your results above indicate that the fastest imperative heap is over 3x faster than the fastest functional heap? -- Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd. http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
