Is Scheme/LISP faster than C/C++
bolega
I am looking for expert opinions
http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.emacs.help/browse_thread/thread/54fb97d15b234d31#
> Probably doesn't meet your intent, but this is a really impressive bit
> of (whacky) art:
Lisp runs faster than C. Once you get more time away from screwing
Palestinians, and other false-flags, you will find ideas like these
How to make Lisp go faster than C
Didier Verna
Abstract
Contrary to popular belief, Lisp code can be very ef-
cient today: it can run as fast as equivalent C code
or even faster in some cases. In this paper, we explain
how to tune Lisp code for performance by introducing
the proper type declarations, using the appropriate
data structures and compiler information. We also
explain how e ciency is achieved by the compilers.
These techniques are applied to simple image process-
ing algorithms in order to demonstrate the announced
performance on pixel access and arithmetic operations
in both languages.
=======
Standard Disclaimer, nothing personal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQapkVCx1HI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXJ-k-iOg0M
Hey Racist and INcompetent FBI Bustards, where is the ANTHRAX Mailer ?
Where are the 4 blackboxes ? Where are the Pentagon Videos ? Why did
you release the 5 dancing Israelis compromising the whole 911
investigation ? If the Dubai Police can catch Mossad Murderers and put
the videos and Iranian Police can why cant you put the Pentagon
Videos ? If Iran police can put the AMERICAN TERRORIST, Riggi and
puting on INTERNATIONAL MEDIA a day after catching him without
TORTURE, why cant you put the INNOCENT patsies on the MEDIA. Why did
you have to LIE about Dr Afiya Siddiqui and torture that Innocent
little mother of 3 and smashing the skull of her one child ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhMcii8smxk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SZ2lxDJmdg
There are CRIMINAL cases against CIA CRIMINAL Bustards in Italian
courts.
FBI bustards paid a penalty of $5.8 million to Steven Hatfill, but
only because he was a white. They got away with MURDER of thousands of
Non-whites in all parts of the world.
Daily 911 news : http://911blogger.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7kGZ3XPEm4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY
bolega
research myself.
On Jun 14, 10:10 am, bolega <gnuist...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Quoting the following post :-
>
> I am looking for expert opinions
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.emacs.help/browse_thread/thread/54...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhMcii8smxkhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SZ2lxDJmdg
nanothermite911fbibustards
>
> > There are CRIMINAL cases against CIA CRIMINAL Bustards in Italian
> > courts.
>
> > FBI bustards paid a penalty of $5.8 million to Steven Hatfill, but
> > only because he was a white. They got away with MURDER of thousands of
> > Non-whites in all parts of the world.
>
> > Daily 911 news :http://911blogger.com
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7kGZ3XPEm4
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY
>
>
Here is the paper :
http://www.iaeng.org/IJCS/issues_v32/issue_4/IJCS_32_4_19.pdf
Get ghostview which can show you better font display of the older
types.
I give good help and I ask people to spread the info in my sig by
quoting it.
The FAT per DIEM FBI bustards use our TAX PAYER MONEY and INCOMPETENCE
is UNACCEPTABLE.
=====
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQapkVCx1HI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXJ-k-iOg0M
Hey Racist and INcompetent FBI Bustards, where is the ANTHRAX Mailer ?
Where are the 4 blackboxes ? Where are the Pentagon Videos ? Why did
you release the 5 dancing Israelis compromising the whole 911
investigation ? If the Dubai Police can catch Mossad Murderers and put
the videos and Iranian Police can why cant you put the Pentagon
Videos ? If Iran police can put the AMERICAN TERRORIST, Riggi and
puting on INTERNATIONAL MEDIA a day after catching him without
TORTURE, why cant you put the INNOCENT patsies on the MEDIA. Why did
you have to LIE about Dr Afiya Siddiqui and torture that Innocent
little mother of 3 and smashing the skull of her one child ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhMcii8smxk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0SZ2lxDJmdg
There are CRIMINAL cases against CIA CRIMINAL Bustards in Italian
courts.
FBI bustards paid a penalty of $5.8 million to Steven Hatfill, but
only because he was a white. They got away with MURDER of thousands of
Non-whites in all parts of the world.
Daily 911 news : http://911blogger.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRfhUezbKLw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7kGZ3XPEm4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX18zUp6WPY
Conclusion : FBI bustards are RACIST and INcompetent. They could
neither catch the ANTHRAX or 911 YANK/Jew criminals nor could they
cover them up - whichever was their actual task.
SLASH the SALARIES of FBI/CIA/NSA etc BUSTARDS into half all across
tbe board, esp the whites/jew on the top.
fortunatus
machine language. Many C compilers can do that over most inputs. So
can many Lisp compilers if you give the right type data. So it's a
moot point.
The only point to discuss would be that Scheme - in the R5 version of
the spec at least - doesn't have standard way to specify type data
unless I am mistaken. Therefore you will find that Scheme compilers
add their own syntax for it. Again we are led to a moot point.
fortunatus
Therefore some compare/contrast of C++ class member function
invocation rate versus Lisp object method invocation rate might be
meaningful. I'm sure if you Google back through comp.lang.lisp you
will find plenty on it already.
Grant Rettke
Raymond Toy
> For crying out loud, the best any compiler can do is make optimal
> machine language. Many C compilers can do that over most inputs. So
Is that why I had to use assembly code instead of C for some parts of my
previous projects?
There was even one example where the C compiler made spectacularly bad
code. I only needed 6 pointer registers (the arch has 8), but the
compiler decided to use only one or two and spilled and reloaded them
from the stack for each use. Yay!
Ray
Aaron W. Hsu
> The only point to discuss would be that Scheme - in the R5 version of
> the spec at least - doesn't have standard way to specify type data
> unless I am mistaken. Therefore you will find that Scheme compilers
> add their own syntax for it. Again we are led to a moot point.
One of the points of something like Chez Scheme is that it compiles
standard Scheme, without additional static typing -- which, personally,
I find rather annoying -- into code that is often quite competitive with
C code if not faster.
More specifically, there is nothing inherently slow about the Scheme
language. While there are some things that are inherently expensive,
they are not more expensive than the equivalent constructs in C by
nature. Scheme can be compiled into very fast code, without resorting to
tricks like type declarations, and there are real life compilers out
there which do this.
I've heard it said, it is easy to beat C compilers for fast code, it's
just hard to beat them at benchmarks written for C. That is, do the same
type of things as what Scheme gives you, such as lots of dynamic
allocation and resizing, higher order functions, and closures, and you
won't find C faster. Benchmarks to compare C with Scheme often don't
compare the things Scheme is good at, but focus only on the static
things that C was designed for.
Aaron W. Hsu
Grant Edwards
> I've heard it said, it is easy to beat C compilers for fast code, it's
> just hard to beat them at benchmarks written for C. That is, do the same
> type of things as what Scheme gives you, such as lots of dynamic
> allocation and resizing, higher order functions, and closures, and you
> won't find C faster.
I don't know about that...
It's hard to beat the speed of a program that segfaults immediately. ;)
It's hardly fair if you're going to demand that the C program actually
works correctly.
--
Grant
fortunatus
> There was even one example where the C compiler made spectacularly bad
> code. I only needed 6 pointer registers (the arch has 8), but the
> compiler decided to use only one or two and spilled and reloaded them
> from the stack for each use. Yay!
That's one of the worst compiler stories I've heard since 1979! How
awful!