On Sunday 14 October 2007 17:22:02 Ian Smith wrote: > After all, Unicode systems *really do* go slower than ASCII systems, and > the test results should reflect that.
Not for people whose languages aren't representable in ASCII. For them, an ASCII system would be much slower If you don't take into account missing functionality, you might as well run your benchmark on a machine with no OS at all (like DOS, for example) and declare it the overall winner. Sure it's faster, but what difference does it make if you can't actually use it for anything useful If all you're interested in is winning benchmarks, I can provide you with patched versions of glibc and bash (where most functions are replaced by NOOP), which would beat all your systems hands down Like you said yourself, compare like with like Anders -- Madness takes its toll -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
