Linked by ebasconp on Fri 10th Jun 2011 22:22 UTC
Benchmarks "Google has released a research paper that suggests C++ is the best-performing programming language in the market. The internet giant implemented a compact algorithm in four languages - C++, Java, Scala and its own programming language Go - and then benchmarked results to find 'factors of difference'."
Thread beginning with comment 476917
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Alfman
Member since:
2011-01-28

Valhalla,

"Certain language characteristics have obvious performance consequences, for instance java, scala, go are all garbage collected which certainly comes with a performance penalty"

That's an assumption, which may or may not be true in practice.

Generational garbage collection algorithms can provide excellent data locality. C/C++ objects are generally forced to live out their lives at a fixed address, which is often not ideal after address space becomes fragmented.

Malloc/Free are more expensive than certain garbage collection algorithms such as semi-space collectors, which are absolutely trivial.

The tradeoffs are too complex to make absolute statements about which is better. I wouldn't be comfortable saying which is better without benchmarking them on a specific project.

The following link advocates garbage collection over malloc/free for performance reasons (although I think their conclusions are biased and overgeneralised)

http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jtp09275/index.htm...


All this said, I personally prefer to control new/delete myself.


"Eiffel wasn't measured here was it? Nor was any other language (I know of Vala) which compiles to C?"

If we compare modern languages which are on more equal footing feature-wise, then which is faster: perl or ruby or python?

I'm saying that it doesn't make sense to compare the *language* (as google claims to have done), one has to compare the *implementation*.

Reply Parent Score: 4