[Shootout-list] main benchmark

[Bengt Kleberg]

Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
...delete
> Fine.  The *MAIN BENCHMARK* should only test the least common
> denominator of all languages.  It cannot, for instance, mandate garbage
> collection.  3rd generation capabilities, i.e. like C, are the only
> things all of the languages have in common.

why this arbitrary stop at c? why not intercal?
seriously, perhaps the java feature set would be a ''industry standard'' 
minimum?


...deleted

> never done anything as loosey-goosey as leave the scoring system up to
> the person running it.  I'm trying to imagine the PC Magazine article
> that would recommend, "Eh, well, you're a smart hacker... look at
> whatever you feel like.  We're sure you'll pick a good PC...."

strangly enough that is what some magazines here in sweden does say. 
they word it more like:

if you want very good graphics then look at x, y and z. if you are doing 
  wordprocessing and want an affordable computer than a, b and c are you 
best bet. finally, those who need a really silent machine for the living 
room should only consider 1, 2 or 3.


> I hope, rather than make 'subtle' arguments that bore us all to death,
> that if you're really opposed to standardized scoring systems, you just
> outright say so.  And maybe some reasons why.  I think it would save us
> a lot of hassle to agree to disagree, since what I'm advancing here is
> hardly rocket science.

there are several steps to take.

step one is if we should have a ''standardized scoring system'' or keep 
craps.
if we go for a standrad system, then we have a substantial amount of 
work cout of for us. namely, how/what to standardise.

i am lazy. i prefer craps.


bengt