[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Tinycc-devel] performances test

From: Laurent Charmet
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] performances test
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:50:59 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20060719)

bertie wrote:
> Hi,
> Here's a benchmarking of several compiled/pre-compiled/interpreted languages, 
> on a "hello world" program.
>    NASM FASM GCC Tcc Pascal Fortran DASH Tcc (interpreted)
>    Lua (interpreted) Gambas KSH Perl C++  Lua (pr├ęcompiled)
>    Ada ZSH TCSH Tcl BASH PHP Python Lush Java
> Tcc is doin' good. Add to this it compiles faster than GCC and offers a very 
> small size compiler... Very impressive. Not to mention it can interpret C, a 
> very good feature that is included within the tests too!
> I can't believe java is 26 times slower. In other words when a java 
> application is launched, in the meantime you could start 26 applications
> written in C. Sad fact, the Java virtual machine shows the same gap on 
> windowze.
Your comparaison is biased because your "Hello World" program is too
simple so too short in execution time.
Java application must init all the java stuff before displaying your
string. It's a fact that Java has an overhead at start, but after with
jit, difference vs C/C++ is about half performance (but it depend, java
can have same performance or sometime 3 ou 4th time worst)
> The results are here:
> http://perso.orange.fr/2007/Code/hworld/index.htm
> Regards,
> Bert
> _______________________________________________
> Tinycc-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]