On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, you wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, someone who Robin's attrib to fscked up wrote:
> >
> > > [side note: I did just see a bizarre thread in macosx-dev where
> > > one guy claimed his FFT code was executing faster in Java than C
> > > because its interpreter used runtime info to optimize it. Search on
> > > 'informal benchmarks']
> >
> > uh huh .. but he's a Java programmer .. his C could be *REALLY* bad ;) ..
> > favourite Java quote 'If javas garbage collector is damn good, how come
> > the whole thing doesn't delete itself upon execution?'
>
> Don't see why this isn't possible. The idea is that you factor out *all*
> really unlikely cases (how you know this is based on past performance) and
> catch them all with some simple test. Then you (more expensively, but who
> cares since this happens only once in a blue moon) deal with it and work
> out exactly what was the problem.
my basic point was: that given that the FFT code uses similar technicques
in both its C and Java variants the C variant will win hands down. if
you're going to throw in completley new techniques then sure you could
skew it the other way around .. but in the end (assuming that both
codesets use similar basic principles) you will not beat the speed of C
with anything other than hand optimised assembler. Now that is a fact.
--
Robin Szemeti
The box said "requires windows 95 or better"
So I installed Linux!
