Running test2() once before running @time test2() (to force compilation) results in a 13% performance improvement on my system.
On Tuesday, 14 January 2014 15:32:16 UTC-6, Przemyslaw Szufel wrote: > > Dear Julia users, > > I am considering using Julia for computational projects. > As a first to get a feeling of the new language a I tried to benchmark > Julia speed against other popular languages. > I used an example code from the Cython tutorial: > http://docs.cython.org/src/tutorial/cython_tutorial.html [ the code for > finding n first prime numbers]. > > Rewriting the code in different languages and measuring the times on my > Windows laptop gave me the following results: > > Language | Time in seconds (less=better) > > Python: 65.5 > Cython (with MinGW): 0.82 > Java : 0.64 > Java (with -server option) : 0.64 > C (with MinGW): 0.64 > Julia (0.2): 2.1 > Julia (0.3 nightly build): 2.1 > > All the codes for my experiments are attached to this post (Cython i > Python are both being run starting from the prim.py file) > > The thing that worries me is that Julia takes much much longer than Cython > ,,, > I am a beginner to Julia and would like to kindly ask what am I doing > wrong with my code. > I start Julia console and use the command include ("prime.jl") to execute > it. > > This code looks very simple and I think the compiler should be able to > optimise it to at least the speed of Cython? > Maybe I my code has been written in non-Julia style way and the compiler > has problems with it? > > I will be grateful for any answers or comments. > > Best regards, > Przemyslaw Szufel >