[Shootout-list] thoughts on the subject of ''compile to native code''

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Bengt Kleberg wrote:
>
> what would be your definition?

I believe that compilers and interpreters are so grossly distinct in
their performance differences in so many cases, that until that changes,
they should be classed separately.  Many of us want to know how much we
have to 'pay' for interpretation.   Thus for any given language, I'd
like to see the best compiled datapoint against the best interpreted
data point.

Even comparing compilers to compilers, we want more than one uber-entry.
A language implementation may not perform as well, but it may have
vastly superior tools support.  If a language has 'second best'
performance, but much better tools support, industrially speaking that's
a win.  That's how I feel when I look at the various Scheme
implementations.  I'm tracking how they perform vs. how good the Windows
support is.

> i, too, would like to be able to see these differences.
> i am discussing if we always need to see them all on the ''top test
> result page'' (or ''plain test result page'', or ''default
> test result page'').

I believe we must always see this, because I believe strongly in the
real-world effect of language advocacy upon tools support.  People go
where the momentum is.  I'm not interested in the Shootout for pure
speculation or knowledge for its own sake.

> surely we can not have all possible combinations?

I think gross distinctions are the important combinations to consider.
Compiled vs. interpreted is a gross distinction in most cases.

> i am trying to discuss
> which combinations we should have on the ''top test result page''.
> one possible way of presenting this page is to only have the
> best result
> of a language. i think that is a good thing. you do not, but
> i have yet
> to see a persuasive argument from you as to why the mix you
> propose is better than mine.

Whenever you formulate your points in terms of 'my burden of proof' as
opposed to yours, I generally find your logic self-serving.  Why
shouldn't *you* be providing a persuasive argument for your own
preference?  And, if we have both provided arguments that we personally
feel are persuasive, how is your statement anything other than, "Well I
like what I have to say better than what someone else says, simply
because I've said it?"  Why should we accept your argument as the
default?

Perhaps you are not interested in gross distinctions.  Perhaps you see
all distinctions as having equal merit.  I will always disagree with
such a world view.  I think we should be concentrating on 'Big Picture'
distinctions.  Compiled vs. interpreted is one of those, in the vast
majority of cases.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every               Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.