|
|
comp.lang.lisp |
> 5.21 seconds of real time > This seems to be on-par with other people's observations. > This compares to 1.037s for OCaml and 0.987s for C++, so SBCL is now much -- Jon Harrop wrote: I wouldn't consider 5 times as slow as a *functional* language very
> On my 1.8GHz AMD64 in 32-bit mode with SBCL 0.9.3 I'm now getting:
> 4.15 seconds of user run time
> 0.62 seconds of system run time
> 0 page faults and
> 509,569,248 bytes consed
> more competitive.
competitive, but it might be fast enough for many problems.
I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people
all day long and I assume they deserve it.
Dogbert