On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Anthony Ferrara <ircmax...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dmitry, > > >> That's not to say there's anything wrong with this approach, nor that > >> there isn't a ton we can learn from it. I think it's a fantastic > >> research effort and plan on digging through it myself. Thank you for > >> open sourcing it. > > > > > > Thanks for good words :) > > > > This work may be adopted for some specific cases. > > 25-30 times speedup on Mandelbrot allows usage for numeric calculation > > instead of C. > > > > https://gist.github.com/dstogov/12323ad13d3240aee8f1 > > > > anyone may repeat the language battle :) > > These tests seem really odd. A 15% speed advantage over GCC -O2? Sure, > it's possible. But I don't think it's likely. It really smells to me > like bias in the testing methodology. (and the lack of an -O3 result > is suspicious as well). > > And looking at the code, I can see why. The PHP version is writing to > an internal buffer, while every other version has to write to STDOUT > on every single iteration. > > So you are intentionally not benchmarking the output in the PHP > version (you even explicitly call ob_start()) but are benchmarking it > in every other version. So in fact, the PHP code does something > different than the rest of the code. > > Sneaky sneaky. Also completely fake. Please, be polite. We opened sources, and the sources of benchmarks. Anyone can repeat this. Smart people may analyze results themselves before claiming others. I think you are smart person, and I respect the things you are doing. Thanks. Dmitry. A proper methodology would have > explicitly disabled any buffer so that the tests all tested the same > thing. Or even better, build up an internal buffer in all of the > implementations. That way you can compare the computation and not rely > on STDOUT (terminal) response. > > Anthony >
