[article: http://fluff.info/blog/arch/00000172.htm ]
Duncan Murdoch wrote: > > If I followed Blair's advice and did everything in C, then > development would take much longer, the code would be much buggier > (even his example has bugs, and he admits it!!) and all those cases > where R is fast enough would just never get done. > I was particularly horrified by this comment: The reader well-versed with Apophenia will notice that there is a memory leak, because apop_test_fisher_exact returns an apop_data struct that never gets freed. But 10,000 lost matrices didn't affect the speed of the program at all. The lesson from this is that the details of memory management that R is handling for you are not such a big deal on a modern PC anyway. So, he does a C code that _doesn't_ check if there is memory before allocating things, then _doesn't_ free memory when it finishes, and naively says that C is 50 times faster than R? Alberto Monteiro ______________________________________________ R-help@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.