On 05/16/2012 09:02 PM, Gregg Lebovitz wrote: > Isaac, > > I was looking at the debian coding contest benchmarks referenced by > others in this discussion. All of the benchmarks algorithms, appear to > be short computationally intensive programs with a fairly low level of > abstraction. > > In almost all examples, the requirement says: you must implement the X > functions as implemented in Java, or C#, or C++. The k-nucleotide even > specifies a requirement to use an update a hash-table. > > I wonder if someone here could come up with a set of benchmarks that > would out perform C++. >
That's easy: > let ones = 1 : ones > take 5 ones [1,1,1,1,1] I'm not sure how much C++ code you'd have to write to produce the correct answer without butchering the intent too much, but the naïve translation to C++ loops infinitely. Obviously Haskell is infintely better than C++!11111oneone! > Interesting that you would focus on this one comment in my post and not > comment on one on countering the benchmarks with a new criteria for > comparing languages. Comparing languages is a highly non-trivial matter involving various disciplines (including various squidgy ones) and rarely makes sense without a very specific context for comparison. So the short answer is: mu. Discovering the long answer requires a lifetime or more of research and may not actually result in an answer. Regards, _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
