[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PCL benchmark
- To: Chris Burdorf <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: PCL benchmark
- From: Warren Harris <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Oct 88 19:47:53 PDT
- Cc: CommonLoops.PA@Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 18 Oct 88 18:46:56 PDT." <8810190147.AA12717@rand.org>
- Redistributed: CommonLoops.PA
> It has practically everything Flavors has, but it was
> designed especially to be fast.
Sounds like a contradiction to me.
You have to think of the things PCL is buying you that you're not taking
into account in the simulation time. For one, can you dynamically add
methods to a class/generic-function in ERNIE, or is there a
class-redefinition protocol to help you at development time? All these
things contribute levels of indirection and consequently speed degradation
at runtime, but with the benefit of enhancing functionality simplifying
development. The trick is for the PCL system to eliminate levels of
indirection with appropriate declarations and/or smarts. This will come
with time, but of course you must realize that it can never come as close
to the speed of a system like ERNIE which was designed under certain
I'd say it sounds like you're comparing ORANGES to COPPER-TUBING or
something. Have you tried C for speed?