On 15/07/07, Hugh Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/15/07, Sebastian Sylvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Argh, no way can a Microsoft language be better than Haskell!!!!]
Well, if you scan higher in the thread, there are two benchmarks. The prime
numbers benchmark was a simple 10 minute benchmark to compare the
computational speed (something which Haskell ought to do well in?)
The other benchmark is OpenGl. I'll try that one soon.
Nice, so because I think your methodology is undiciplined and tells
you nothing useful, I must be biased against microsoft products right?
Btw, guess what company name is on my paycheck every month? That's
right, microsoft. I'm not biased in any way against microsoft products
(since I make them myself!).
Nobody is claiming that Haskell is the best language for writing tight
inner assembly like loops. So what's the point in making those
comparisons? How about you write some programs that do algebraic
manipulations of data structures? Something a bit more representative
of real world code, and a bit more high level? Or how about you just
take a look at the shootout I linked you to? They have far more
benchmarks than you'll have time to implement, I'm sure.
--
Sebastian Sylvan
+44(0)7857-300802
UIN: 44640862
_______________________________________________
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
