http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all&xfullcpu=1&xmem=1&xloc=0&binarytrees=1&chameneos=1&message=1&fannkuch=1&fasta=1&knucleotide=1&mandelbrot=1&meteor=0&nbody=1&nsieve=1&nsievebits=1&partialsums=1&pidigits=1&recursive=1&regexdna=0&revcomp=1&spectralnorm=1&hello=1&sumcol=1&calc=Calculate CPU and Memory weighted equally: FPC is the second. :-|

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all&xfullcpu=1&xmem=0&xloc=0&binarytrees=1&chameneos=1&message=1&fannkuch=1&fasta=1&knucleotide=1&mandelbrot=1&meteor=0&nbody=1&nsieve=1&nsievebits=1&partialsums=1&pidigits=1&recursive=1&regexdna=0&revcomp=1&spectralnorm=1&hello=1&sumcol=1&calc=Calculate CPU only (mem weighted 0): FPC is the sixth! (below C++ and Eiffel) :(

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=all&xfullcpu=0&xmem=1&xloc=0&binarytrees=1&chameneos=1&message=1&fannkuch=1&fasta=1&knucleotide=1&mandelbrot=1&meteor=0&nbody=1&nsieve=1&nsievebits=1&partialsums=1&pidigits=1&recursive=1&regexdna=0&revcomp=1&spectralnorm=1&hello=1&sumcol=1&calc=Calculate Memory only (CPU weighted 0): FPC is the first! :-D

Obviously, some C programmers has done some more optimizations. :(

-Bee-

has Bee.ography at:
http://beeography.wordpress.com

Bisma Jayadi wrote

Obviously, some C programmers has done some more optimizations. :(

So it obviously means that gcc does not beat fpc (and that fpc did not beat gcc before), but simply that the C programs beat the Pascal programs (and that it was the other way around before that). It's just a game for programmers and fanboys who want to show of their skills and/or favourite compiler/language, but largely irrelevant as far as comparing different compilers is concerned (and even more so as far as comparing different programming languages is concerned).

Jonas

Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Bisma Jayadi:

No C programs have been submitted recently. It is probably the new broken scoring system.

Daniël

No C programs have been submitted recently. It is probably the new broken scoring system.

Is Shootout using new scoring system? How did you know that?

-Bee-

has Bee.ography at:
http://beeography.wordpress.com

Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Bisma Jayadi:

> No C programs have been submitted recently. It is probably the new broken > scoring system. Is Shootout using new scoring system? How did you know that?

See the long thread on the forum. It penalizes Pascal because we have a bad score for Chameneos; many languages, evade this now by not implementing Chameneos. Ironically, this is because most implementations use a flawed Chameneos implementation.

Perhaps we should submit a flawed implementation too.

Daniël

favourite compiler/language, but largely irrelevant as far as comparing different compilers is concerned (and even more so as far as comparing different programming languages is concerned).

Of course it's very relevant since they are all using same algorithms (please read http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/faq.php#implementp and http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp4/faq.php#contest). So, this is actually about compilers performance benchmark upon its implementation of the language.

-Bee-

has Bee.ography at:
http://beeography.wordpress.com

Bisma Jayadi wrote

Of course it's very relevant since they are all using same algorithms

No, because there are lot of ways to implement a single algorithm. Do you use ansistrings, shortstrings, arrays of char, or pchars? Do you use getmem or dynamic arrays? Do you use reference or value parameters (with or without "const")? Do you use virtual methods, function pointers or case statements?

Most of the discussions I've seen on irc about these benchmarks were at least about ways to tweak the Pascal code so it became faster (either because the compiler can then optimize it better, or because you are using lower level features which you probably wouldn't use when writing a production application rather than a website benchmark). This has little to do with how the compiler performs in real world situations.

Jonas

Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Jonas Maebe:

Sorry, but this is nonsense. If you care about speed in real world you do exactly the same: Tweak the code, use low level features, use shortstrings, and so on.

It might be true that in real world application you use more high level features, but that is because you value comfort higher than speed then. For performance benchmarks, this is irrelevant.

Daniël

It's obvious that the benchmark is flawed. This is also stated at their website. everyone knows that benchmarks are flawed

I'd say it's more like a game.

But, it's also interresting to see that in all benchmarks I've ever seen Perl, Python and Java are dozens of times slower and consumes dozens of times more memory then c or pascal software.

And it's also nice to see that pascal compares to c in speed. (The exact detail about if one is better in this benchmark or not is of course irrelevant). This means that if I ever need it, I can tweak my pascal code to be very fast.

The one missing FPC program measures the speed and abilities of the regular expressions engine from language distribution.

Tonow FPC one has not enough abilities, but the engine may be written even exclusively in assembler or C: what matters is whether it is present in the distribution and has headers file.

So this test qualifies basic I/O operations and the distribution.

NO: C gcc has the first Place C is not Object oriented, FPC is Object oriented.
And g++ is behind fpc.

regards
Christian

Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Christian Ulrich:

NO: C gcc has the first Place C is not Object oriented, FPC is Object oriented.

Very few OOP is used in the Pascal implementations, so Pascal and C are on equal grounds here.

Daniël

Very few OOP is used in the Pascal implementations, so Pascal and C are on equal grounds here.

musnt the memory manager included if only few oo stuff is included ? why g++ is soo mutch slower than gcc if so few oo stuff is used ??

pure c is no higher level laguage for me. asm is not soo mutch more complex. pascal oo or not has so mutch more features its no compare.

Op Wed, 23 May 2007, schreef Christian Ulrich:

? The heap manager is always in the exe; it cannot be smarlinked away.

You can use the heap manager without using oo, so I don't understand this question.

why g++ is soo mutch slower than gcc if so few oo stuff is used ??

g++ implementations use C++ features. OOP is just one of them. Many use templates, or operator overloading, and some use OOP.

pure c is no higher level laguage for me. asm is not soo mutch more complex. pascal oo or not has so mutch more features its no compare.

That is a rather limited view you have; OO is not equal to a high level language. and using Pascal does not necessarily mean you use OO.

Daniël

Maybe I can find my initial implementation again. IIRC it was about 10 times faster ;-) (or was it 5)

Marc