Lua is faster than Fortran???

[D'Arcy J.M. Cain]

On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 23:46:10 +0900
David Cournapeau <cournape at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 11:23 PM, D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy at druid.net> wrote:
> > Which is 99% of the real-world applications if you factor out the code
> > already written in C or other compiled languages.
> 
> This may be true, but there are areas where the percentage is much
> lower. Not everybody uses python for web development. You can be a
> python fan, be reasonably competent in the language, and have good
> reasons to wish for python to be one order of magnitude faster.

I wish it was orders of magnitude faster for web development.  I'm just
saying that places where we need compiled language speed that Python
already has that in C.

But, as I said in the previous message, in the end it is up to you to
write your own benchmark based on the operations you need and the usage
patterns you predict that it will need as well.  If your application
needs to calculate Pi to 100 places but only needs to do it once there
is no need to include that in your benchmark a million times.  A
language that is optimized for calculating Pi shouln't carry a lot of
weight for you.

> I find LUA quite interesting: instead of providing a language simple
> to develop in, it focuses heavily on implementation simplicity. Maybe
> that's the reason why it could be done at all by a single person.

Is that really true about LUA?  I haven't looked that closely at it but
that paragraph probably turned off most people on this list to LUA.

-- 
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy at druid.net>         |  Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/                |  and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212     (DoD#0082)    (eNTP)   |  what's for dinner.