Comment by krig

11 years ago

Considering that SBCL is among the fastest programming language implementations there is, 100x is actually not terrible for a first version.

12 comments

krig

Reply
sigil  11 years ago

> Considering that SBCL is among the fastest programming language implementations there is...

Source for this? I'd love to find a really fast lisp or scheme. Hadn't heard SBCL was particularly fast, and the alioth benchmarks don't show anything special there.

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?t...

Edit: actually SBCL stacks up alright against languages like Go or Rust in the alioth benchmarks, so maybe that's what you had in mind.

  • krig  11 years ago

    I'd say those numbers you link to are pretty amazing for a garbage collected language. Compared to Java, SBCL is roughly on par, with some benchmarks 2-3x slower and some 2-3x faster.

    edit: To clarify, I'm not saying SBCL makes Common Lisp the fastest language (I don't even think that's a meaningful statement). But to be within 2-3x of the JVM or C (and even outperforming C in some scenarios) certainly puts SBCL among the fastest language implementations. All the other ones you mention (C, C++, Go, Java..) are indeed also among the fastest. :)

  • mrottenkolber  11 years ago

    > Hadn't heard SBCL was particularly fast

    What did you think was particularly faster than SBCL?

    • sigil  11 years ago

      > What did you think was particularly faster than SBCL?

      Haskell, Scala, Java, Go and of course C, C++, Fortran all outperform SBCL in the alioth benchmarks.

      Against the schemes, lisps, and "scripting" languages though SBCL stacks up favorably. I didn't notice that krig's comment was mainly comparing SBCL to this latter category ("programming language implementations").

      6 replies →