Isaac Gouy wrote:
IG>  I'm not interested in squabbling about how arbitrary and stupid that is

What a strange coincidence.  I was responding to your new comments on
http://www.jsoftware.com/jwiki/DanBron/Naive?action=diff&rev2=22&rev1=19 
when I saw this message come in.

I'm glad you joined the Forum.  Since you're here now, I think I'll take the
discussion off that page.  Any further comments can be posted here.  But not
by me.  I think this will be my last comment on the matter.  Even as I was
composing my response on the Wiki, I could tell the discussion was just
going in circles, and wouldn't get us anywhere but annoyed.

IG>   it is what it is, take it or leave it.  

Agreed.  And, AFAICT the consensus is "leave it".  At least, Raul's recent
message expressed my feelings well in 
http://www.jsoftware.com/pipermail/programming/2007-December/008982.html  :

RM>  In my opinion, benchmarks [like Alioth] can only be meaningful
RM>  when considering different implementations of the same underlying 
RM>  language. 

(I hope I haven't put words in his mouth by substituting my bracketed
comment for his original language)

Alioth benchmarks something, and it's clear what that something is, but it's
not clear (to me), that benchmarking that something is useful.  It certainly
isn't answering the question(s) I'd ask about different programming
languages.  

Of course, I understand _why_ Alioth benchmarks what it does:  you can only
benchmark what you can measure, and it is clear how to objectively measure
speed and parsimony (code size is fuzzier).  

I guess all I'm saying is that it would be much harder to measure the
advantages J provides to me.  But that doesn't mean I'm willing to "settle"
for Alioth; those metrics aren't even on the same axis.  

Project Euler comes closer, and I am not surprised that APL/J/K are on the
leaderboard there (nor am I surprised that pencil & paper often beat them
out, despite having a much, much slower "compiler").

I have more to say, but I think I'll skip it.  As I said, I doubt this
discussion will be fruitful, and I doubt that I will reply to further
messages on the subject (even replies to this one).

-Dan
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Computer-Language-Benchmarks-Game-tf4922865s24193.html#a14202795
Sent from the J Programming mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to