Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-05-04 Thread Scott Jones
On May 4, 2015, at 7:56 AM, Tamas Papp tkp...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 04 2015, Scott Jones scott.paul.jo...@gmail.com wrote: On May 4, 2015, at 3:21 AM, Tamas Papp tkp...@gmail.com wrote: I think you misunderstand: IOBuffer is suggested not for mutable string operations in

RE: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-05-04 Thread David Anthoff
, a github issue seems ideal. Thanks, David From: julia-users@googlegroups.com [mailto:julia-users@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Jones Sent: Monday, May 4, 2015 5:30 AM To: julia-users@googlegroups.com; Tamas Papp Subject: Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia

Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-05-04 Thread Tony Kelman
...@googlegroups.com javascript: [mailto: julia...@googlegroups.com javascript:] *On Behalf Of *Scott Jones *Sent:* Monday, May 4, 2015 5:30 AM *To:* julia...@googlegroups.com javascript:; Tamas Papp *Subject:* Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best

Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-05-01 Thread Steven Sagaert
Scott, You shouldn't take my reply personal. It wasn't really about the specific string case you mentioned but more in general about Python julia performance comparisons. On Friday, May 1, 2015 at 3:10:14 PM UTC+2, Scott Jones wrote: On May 1, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Steven Sagaert

Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-05-01 Thread Scott Jones
No, I don't take hardly anything personally [my problem is that expect others to do the same]. I just want to understand Julia as best as possible, and improve her if I can... and I think reasoned debates about the technical issues (as opposed to... I just like this better, I think that looks

Re: [julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-05-01 Thread Scott Jones
On May 1, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Steven Sagaert steven.saga...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, May 1, 2015 at 12:26:54 PM UTC+2, Scott Jones wrote: On Friday, May 1, 2015 at 4:25:50 AM UTC-4, Steven Sagaert wrote: I think the performance comparisons between Julia Python are flawed. They

[julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-04-30 Thread Páll Haraldsson
Hi, [As a best language is subjective, I'll put that aside for a moment.] Part I. The goal, as I understand, for Julia is at least within a factor of two of C and already matching it mostly and long term beating that (and C++). [What other goals are there? How about 0.4 now or even 1.0..?]

[julia-users] Performance variability - can we expect Julia to be the fastest (best) language?

2015-04-30 Thread Ivar Nesje
That was lots of questions. I'll answer one. I know to get the best speed, 0.4 is needed. Still, (for the above) what are the problems for 0.3? Have most of the fixed speed issues been backported? Is Compat.jl needed (or have anything to do with speed?) I think slicing and threads stuff (and