Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- From: Javier <javuchi@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:03:55 -0800 (PST)
On 29 nov, 13:46, Juho Snellman <jsn...@xxxxxx> wrote:
Of course, SBCL is much faster for fixnum and float operations.
And here you are grossly misrepresenting the results, by implying that
SBCL is only faster than clisp for benchmarks that test fixnum/float
performance.
I never said is ONLY faster htan clisp.
Consider CLISP for web, string manipulation, and CLOS. It is a very
capable Lisp distribution for these areas.
I wouldn't advise people to make decisions on what implementation to
use
I don't. I said "consider".
I expect that people interested
in CLOS performance would care a lot more about method call
performance than the speed of defining classes...
Basically, this depends on the kind of CLOS program you are doing. For
example, my program is doing millions of instantiations, and much less
method calls. I wouldn't advise people to make decisions on what
implementation to not use, without understanding what the program of
everyone are actually doing. ;)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- From: Juho Snellman
- Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- References:
- Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- From: Javier
- Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- From: Geoff Wozniak
- Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- From: Javier
- Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- From: Juho Snellman
- Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- Prev by Date: Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- Next by Date: Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- Previous by thread: Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- Next by thread: Re: Reasons to choose CLISP over other free implementations
- Index(es):