On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 03:11:36 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 2/22/2018 10:31 PM, Python wrote: > >>> Why do you care about the 50 million calls? That's crazy -- the >>> important thing is *calculating the Fibonacci numbers as efficiently >>> as possible*. > >> If you are writing practical programs, that's true. But the Julia >> benchmarks are not practical programs; they are designed to compare the >> performance of various language features across a range of languages. > > If that were so, then the comparison should use the fastest *Python* > implementation. Which is what the article discussed here did. But the > comparison is a lie when the comparison is compiled machine code versus > bytecode interpreted by crippled cpython*. And people use this sort of > benchmark to choose a language for *practical programs*, and don't know > that they are not seeing *Python* times, but *crippled cpython* times.
Benchmarks are completely pointless anyway. the question when choosing a language should not be 'How fast it is', it should always be 'Is it fast enough'. once you have a choice of languages that are fast enough other criteria for suitability become important (such as readability & ease of debugging) -- If you're going to do something tonight that you'll be sorry for tomorrow morning, sleep late. -- Henny Youngman -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list