On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Marko Topolnik <marko.topol...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Things don't look very rosy for Clojure: it turns out to be about as > verbose as Java and significantly slower (this confirms my experience; > slightly slower than *regular* Java code, significantly slower than > highly optimized Java). If idiomatic Clojure was used, it would move it to > the left and upwards; Clojure would hang out with JRuby. > Hang out with JRuby? Seriously? http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=clojure&lang2=jruby Having written two test.benchmark entries which compare quite favorably to Java, I think the current crop of Alioth benchmarks could use a bit of improvement both in terms of code quality and performance. There's no reason that every single Clojure Alioth benchmark should not be near competitive with the corresponding Java Alioth benchmark in terms of time, memory, and code size except for lack of community interest. Probably because none of these things will ever reveal Clojure performance for non-trivial applications. It's much more convincing for example when Prismatic engineers say they can happily achieve Java performance without verbosity. http://blog.getprismatic.com/blog/2012/4/5/software-engineering-at-prismatic.html David -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
