Mike Raiford wrote:

> I guess that lends credence to Andrew said about mono being slower than 
> even Haskell.

Regarding "slower than even Haskell":

http://tinyurl.com/dj3wm3

At the top of the tree sits C++. Directly below that is C. Directly 
below that is ATS. And the very next thing on the list is... Haskell.

It's faster than Java, it's faster than Smalltalk, it's faster than 
Lisp, it's faster than Erlang, it's faster than Mono, it's faster than 
Fortran, it's faster than Clean or OCaml... in fact, it's faster than 
everything in the entir shootout apart from C, C++ and ATS.

Of course, the beauty of the shootout is that if you twiddle the knobs 
and dails enough, you can make *any* language "win". So I wouldn't put 
too much faith into the exact numbers produced. But the fact that 
Haskell ends up anywhere near the top of the list means it can't 
possibly be *that* damned slow.

So it's possible to write fast code in Haskell. As Warp keeps pointing 
out, the trick is working out how to make your code go fast; it turns 
out to be a bit unpredictable...

Post a reply to this message