The documentation page seems to be down at the moment, but when it's back up see the "performance tips" page.
In particular, - never benchmark anything in global scope, always wrap it in a function - always run once before you benchmark it (to force JIT compilation) --Tim On Sunday, July 10, 2016 9:19:13 PM CDT Zhong Pan wrote: > Hi, > > For work I really desired a language for numerical / data processing that's > as easy and capable as Python but still fast running loops. That's why I am > very excited when I noticed Julia. First allow me to me say, fabulous work! > I really appreciate the effort of those who make open-source software great > for everyone. > > I did a simple & naive benchmark involving brutal-force loops with some > floating-point calculations on Windows (have to use Windows for work). I > measured execution time in Python, Julia, VC++, C#.NET, Java, and Matlab. > To my surprise, Julia is not only much slower than VC++ in this test, but > it's much slower than C#.NET, Java, and even Matlab. > > Please see details of the test in the attached PDF file. Could someone help > me out here - did I make an amateur mistake or miss something? Was Julia > slow because of Windows? Or was it just the loops that's slow (as this > "benchmark" really didn't test anything else)? I really want to make Julia > my go-to language in work, so any suggestion is appreciated. > > Cheers. > -Zhong
