Are you using Integer/Double objects by any chance in Java? I've found
using them to be a surefire way of destroying Java's performance...
On Saturday, July 5, 2014 3:11:47 AM UTC-4, gentlebeldin wrote:
>
> It's hard to tell for sure, I wouldn't know how to check that. I prefer to
> port a few more solutions. My curiosity was much increased by this one:
>
> julia> include("julia/jl/e443gcd.jl")
> elapsed time: 3.255950529 seconds (929628 bytes allocated)
>
>
> The Java original "runs" much longer, 33 seconds.
>
> Am Freitag, 4. Juli 2014 21:36:30 UTC+2 schrieb Stefan Karpinski:
>>
>> Maybe we need to undeprecate the order keyword until we can make function
>> arguments faster. When I deprecated that, I figured we'd have that soon,
>> but it hasn't happened yet. In this case, I wonder if the comparison
>> function is getting inlined in C++ but not in Julia. The function call
>> overhead could make a 2x difference like you're seeing.
>>
>>
>>
