[Shootout-list] Optimizing for speed vs. beauty

[Brandon J. Van Every]

William Douglas Neumann wrote:
> >
> > http://pleac.sourceforge.net/
>
> So they aren't really optimizing for beauty either -- they
> want to stay  close to the Perl way where possible.

I think interested parties should just get on the PLEAC list and talk to
them.  Their homepage says something different yet again, it says, "If
successful, this project may become a primary resource for quick, handy
and free reference to solve most common programming problems using
higher-level programming languages, and for comparison on ease-of-use
and power/efficiency of these languages."  The latter goals are about
beauty, as John was asking about.  Now, maybe the guy who wrote that
text isn't 'the powerful one' of the PLEAC group, and maybe it's a
misleading statement, but that's what the fun job of politics is all
about, right?

In any event, PLEAC is certainly closer to being an appropriate venue
for 'beauty' than the Shootout is.  The Shootout has always been mainly
about performance and measuring stuff.  You can't put a number on
beauty, unless you're into gratuitous lying.  Aside from beauty being in
the eye of the beholder, i.e. the whole 'worse is better' school of
thought, there's no extant work in the Shootout regarding beauty.
You're talking about starting a completely new agenda from scratch.
Thus I would suggest, either get PLEAC people on board with the idea and
leverage other people's labor... or start yet another website with your
exact goals.

Just my opinion, of course.  And I'm fully expecting Bengt to weigh in
with his famous words, "I am lazy."

What the Shootout actually does do, is make it easy to see comparable
code snippets.  Any given language pundit could submit a 'more
beautiful' example if they so chose.  Usually this means a more
idiomatic example for the given language.  But I haven't heard anyone
say "Please take this code for the Shootout, because it is more
beautiful."  People always say, "Please take it because it performs
better."  Granted, people often comment on how ugly and awful the code
they're replacing is.

So, I think the Shootout can promote greater beauty in the test
snippets, but only by getting more language communities 'on the ball'
with supporting their favorite language.  I see that as the
responsibility of the language communities, mostly.  The Shootout should
provide an easy filing process, not require complicated procedures, act
within reasonable time on submissons, and remain stable so the results
can be used effectively.  But why would any Shootout person be
interested in contacting / promoting / reminding / administrating /
every / all language communities out there?  This isn't paid work.

I think even a well-funded corporation would restrict themselves to
languages that are demonstrating a presence in the marketplace, and have
the financial resources to look after their own organization and
promotion.  i.e. the paid point of contact to SPEC, or the promo guy who
gives away motherboards to Tom's Hardware Guide.  Otherwise you go broke
worrying about people who aren't good business partners.


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

"The pioneer is the one with the arrows in his back."
                          - anonymous entrepreneur