> > responsive. Python is known to be much more efficient (actually close > > to/same as C++, there's a paper on that). This is end-user relevant, > > indirectly maybe. > > Python is known to be much more efficient? At what? I'd like to see > some proof of that, and in a form other than contrived benchmarks.
Published in a peer-reviewed reputable journal. I'd be interested to read your published comments on the issue ;) The journal is this: http://www.computer.org/computer/ I came across it because it was mentioned in that Sun memo. @Article{prechelt:empirical, author = {Lutz Prechelt}, title = {An empirical comparison of seven programming languages}, journal = {Computer}, year = {2000}, volume = {33}, number = {10}, pages = {23--29}, annote = {Referenced by a leaked internal memo from Sun, \url{www.internalmemos.com/memos/memodetails.php?memo_id=1321}} , ISSN = {0018-9162}, database = {ieeexplore.ieee.org}, abstract = {Often heated, debates regarding different programming languages' effectiveness remain inconclusive because of scarce data and a lack of direct comparisons. The author addresses that challenge, comparatively analyzing 80 implementations of the phone-code program in seven different languages (C, C++, Java, Perl, Python, Rexx and Tcl). Further, for each language, the author analyzes several separate implementations by different programmers. The comparison investigates several aspects of each language, including program length, programming effort, runtime efficiency, memory consumption, and reliability. The author uses comparisons to present insight into program language performance}, } -- Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
