[Shootout-list] Directions of various benchmarks

[Jon Harrop]

On Sunday 15 May 2005 09:16, Einar Karttunen wrote:
> Many of the removed benchmarks were about datastructures

Which ones?

> and most of the new ones seem to be array related number crunching.

Yes, although the ray tracer is FP-bound but is based on a scene tree.

> I would like to see 
> more activity on e.g. graphs or trees with concurrent updates.

Regarding trees, most languages (e.g. C, Fortran, C++, Java, C#) will not be 
able to express tree-based programs in 100 LOC unless they use their standard 
library, in which case it will be using specified functionality and you 
probably can't guarantee its internal representation. I would not object to 
some programs being represented in OCaml by a balanced binary tree and in 
C/Fortran by a hash table, for example.

My "nth" benchmark is graph-related. I've just got to get around to rewriting 
the input code so that it can handle some lowest-common-denominator file 
format.

> Another idea would be an interpreter for a small language.

I've think we've decided that this isn't going to happen as the vast majority 
of languages will not be able to express this in <100 LOC and most of the 
remaining languages would use lex and yacc to get the job done.

-- 
Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
Objective CAML for Scientists
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists