Geoff: > I just tested python on an ipad and it took about 30 seconds for fib(33).
30 seconds for Python, you say; my, my, the plot’s getting thicker and thicker. I tested with Livecode just now for an up-to-date comparison. It’s 11 seconds for that base algorithm on iPhone 5S; and 437 *micro* seconds for your optimized algorithm. Btw, it’s 103 seconds and 3 milliseconds, respectively, on the iPod 4 which is a very weak device, of course. iPhone 5S is probably more powerful than iPad -depending on its model- but even if that is the case, I don’t think it’ll be much worse. So, in my opinion, it won't be unjust to say that Livecode beats Python on mobile fair and square. That’s kinda relief for me, I mean, it increases confidence to my choice of platform. Geoff: > As long as LC is dynamic (not compiled) it is unlikely to be as fast as C. Expecting Livecode or any other RAD tool to be as fast as any low-level language, especially C, is a dream, of course; I’m aware of that. Even Objective-C can’t be compared to C; I’ve read many showcases where Objective-C developers fall back to C for select demanding tasks. However, your statement of *dynamic vs compiled* caught my attention. I have no formal education in computer sciences, whatsoever; so I don’t know the core difference(s) between those concepts. If I should understand by “compiled” that Livecode won’t be “live” anymore and that I have to wait my script's compilation to see my work; I’d happily sacrifice it for any level of performance bump. But if “dynamic and not-compiled” brings us the convenience of flexible type variables, ease of syntax, scripting the objects individually, etc.; well, that’s a different story; I should shut my mouth immediately, then :) ~ Ender _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode