Nimrod

Performance

Asked by poul_yos

What is the performance? In comparision with Java, Haskell...

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Solved
For:
Nimrod Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Solved by:
Andreas Rumpf
Solved:
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Best Andreas Rumpf (rumpf-a) said : 		#1

I would be suprised if it wouldn't be better than Java and Haskell. Benchmarks have not beem ported yet though and support for threads is missing. But in the worst case, you can get exactly the same performance as with C if you decide to write as low-level Nimrod code as C requires you to do. That said the only real overhead Nimrod has over C is the GC (which has been tuned for years and is significantly faster than Boehm's GC).

Revision history for this message
poul_yos (bulg-ngs) said : 		#2

Thanks! I tried factorial and compared with C (gcc) and see that Nimrod looks good.

Andreas, your's project is cool, looks very interestion. A special small C "system" module (may be it's possible to generate different C system module for different architecture, may be for embedded devices...). Only one moment is not so cool - syntax of "generics" (templates) - looks like C++. More interesting is syntax in D 2 (Digital Mars, I mean) with compile-time execution of code, something like: mycollect!(int, int) - template is like function calling in compile time http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/templates-revisited.html. But I suppose it's your's architectural design.

In any case, thanks for your job, Nimrod is very perspective project, I think, specially with it performance!