← Back to context

Comment by glitchc

8 months ago

I have no dog in this fight, but feel compelled to defend the authors here. Recursion does not test compute, rather it tests the compiler's/interpreter's efficiency at standing up and tearing down the call stack.

Clearly this language is positioned at using the gpu for compute-heavy applications and it's still in its early stages. Recursion is not the target application and should not be a relevant benchmark.

12 comments

glitchc

Reply
light_hue_1  8 months ago

[flagged]

  • Twirrim  8 months ago

    Okay, no. I know I called out performance in my post, but that was just from my observations. It surprised me to see something be that much slower than pure python. If you show me a near-python code example in a new language, as someone who mostly writes python code, I'm going to go and write it in python and see how it compares performance wise.

    The authors never made any kind of false claims at all. You're reading a lot in to both their README and my post.

    They've updated the README for a bit of clarity, but even re-reading the README as it was when I looked this morning (and even a few from before) it hasn't claimed to be fast. The claims are all related to the features that it does have, around parallelisation.