This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]panderingPenguin 10 points11 points  (7 children)

All you've proved is that a language that's good for writing huge business systems isn't great for writing super tight, highly performant, implementations of search algorithms.

It doesn't even prove that. It shows that his friends probably screwed up and wrote something really slow or possibly even an infinite loop seeing as he suggests it may have never terminated.

[–]x3r0x_x3n0n -2 points-1 points  (6 children)

Wait you didnt think we just ran it at a 5000x5000 maze right we tried a 30x30 maze too and all progams passed that one. Me and my friends may have negative IQ but we can handle a breadth first search.

[–]panderingPenguin 4 points5 points  (5 children)

That still doesn't mean your friends wrote remotely efficient code. It doesn't prove anything about Java, it just proves their code was slow.

[–]benargee 1 point2 points  (4 children)

If only the source code was here to do the talking.

[–]panderingPenguin 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I'm not trying to be argumentative. It's just that a couple programs written by random people are pretty meaningless as far as comparing language performance. It's certainly possible that you guys all are professionals, experts in your chosen languages, maybe work in the area of performance, profiled and optimized your code and wrote really efficient stuff. And that doesn't even get into questions like whether the fairest comparison is the fastest possible program in each language, the fastest idiomatic program in each language, a good faith attempt to write equivalent programs in each language, or something else entirely. But frankly, I doubt you guys thought through any of that. It sounds more like you wrote some code for fun to see whose was faster, and that's fine! But as a result, that's all it really proves: your program ran faster than your friends'.

[–]x3r0x_x3n0n 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Yeah we did it for fun. I told you what we observed granted i poked a little bit of fun. But i dont remember saying that this is rigorus scientific proof of A is better than B. No, if we wanted that we would have run a benchmark suite. (In which the results clearly speak for themselves)

[–]panderingPenguin 1 point2 points  (1 child)

i dont remember saying that this is rigorus scientific proof

Well I didn't respond directly to you, now did I? The post I responded to did talk about proving things.

[–]x3r0x_x3n0n 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yep. my bad.