Re: [q-lang-users] Benchmarks

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

Eddie Rucker wrote:
> A 64 bit port would be nice but except for arithmetic, I don't see 64 bits 
> speeding up interpreter that much (correct me if I'm wrong).

No, you're right, but still it's essential to get Q working on 64 bit
without any hitches asap. That's the next thing on my TODO list after
porting Qt/Q to Qt4 (which is halfway done now). Yes, I promised this
before, but I'm getting serious about it now. ;-)

> I would like to follow the same evaluation procedure against mzscheme (my other favorite interpreter) and see how Q compares. 
> Mzscheme is not particularly fast either but is useful because of its design and the libraries (modules) provided.

Well, MzScheme seems to do fairly well in the Shootout, actually. I'm
going to give it a try. (I already tried the latest version of UMB
Scheme, but it doesn't appear to work on my SUSE Linux system.)

Albert

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag