[Shootout-list] Stuff (wide range of languages, external libraries)

[Isaac Gouy]

> My intention was just to state that I think having a wide variety of
> tests is a good thing. If some of them can't be implemented in a some
> languages, I don't see a problem in it. If that feature is important
> to you (Unicode, OOP, etc), then you'll pay attention to those tests.
> If not, you won't.

object and object-methods are now perhaps the most widely ridiculed
tests (except was the previous winner on that score).

I almost agree with Pascal Obry that "the speed of a method
dynamic-binding is quite interesting" - almost. 

The 'interesting' thing is the speed of dynamic-binding relative to
static-binding in the language you're using.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com