[Shootout-list] Directions of various benchmarks

[Jon Harrop]

On Monday 16 May 2005 08:27, Einar Karttunen wrote:
> Sets and maps are quite common in real world problems and reflecting how
> easily and efficiently they can be used in different languages would be
> nice. Picking a suitable benchmark is harder...

"nth" will be a good test of sets. As for maps, I can't think of a good test 
right now...

> > I 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.
>
> I think it could be expressed even in C with <100 LOC using reverse
> polish syntax. One could e.g. have fibonacci(some_suitable_number) as
> input. I am not saying that we should have this as a test,

I think it would only be interesting if the language was representative of 
modern programming languages and not reverse Polish notation so an 
interpreter can be written in C.

> just that 
> adding yet another number crunching test does not seem very good.

I think we should add more number crunching tests before throwing some out.

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