Micro-benchmarks are statistics, and of course, you can angle your benchmark to tell whatever story you want. Yes, this stuff is subject to various tricks and short-circuits
OTOH, You can drown out anything with enough skepticism and if you are so emotionally entrenched, you can refuse to believe anything. I believe my benchmarks were meaningful in a small way. If you refuse to believe them, I'm not going to labor an argument further. the guys over here: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/. put a *ton* of time into polishing these types of micro-benchmarks and still they aren't remotely perfect. I don't have the motivation to sink that much time + effort into that. On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 11:23:29 AM UTC-5, Casper Bang wrote: > > > I feel the same sentiment though in reverse. Why are so many people, even >> in a Java group, pointing out how much faster C# is with integer arrays, >> when benchmarks indicate the exact opposite? >> > > I feel tempted to say something about the uselessness of micro-benchmarks > on a managed runtime, and yet somehow attracted to dive into the matter. > However before doing so, you should make multiple runs, cut away the best > 25% and the worst 25% and average the result. Then normalize your numbers > to make it comparable across platforms. Also, how about coming up with a > real problem less susceptible to compiler/JIT short-circuits, i.e. finding > primes via % and use array/list as cache? This would also allow Scala > enthusiasts start beating the concurrency drum. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/7N9hcUFa0HEJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
