The article is great and interesting... But I'll react on the FUD aspect :-) (otherwise, it *is* really interesting minus the apple/orange comparison part)
But your Groovy sample is really not reflecting reality, and makes apples and oranges comparisons. By default Groovy uses BigDecimal for it's decimal numbers, which means you're doing a mix of double and BigD arithmetics, which slows down Groovy terribly, compared to the other languages which use doubles by default. So this is a bit misleading. Add a 'd' suffix to the numbers, and you'll have a more fair comparison! (ie. 3.4d, 4d, etc) Guillaume On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 02:29, Rémi Forax <[email protected]> wrote: > Hum, nobody answer ? > > I have written a blog with a small benchmark that can be instructive: > http://weblogs.java.net/blog/forax/archive/2010/05/24/jvm-language-developpers-your-house-burning > > Rémi > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "JVM Languages" group. > 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/jvm-languages?hl=en. > > -- Guillaume Laforge Groovy Project Manager Head of Groovy Development at SpringSource http://www.springsource.com/g2one -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. 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/jvm-languages?hl=en.
