News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on New stable release of Go. Parent comment

Re:New stable release of Go by uriel on Thursday May 05, 2011 @02:00PM (#2518299)
First of all, it is quite obvious that Go and OCaml are completely different languages designed around very different philosophies and styles.

Also saying that you are not trolling doesn't make your comment any less trollish, specially given that your only claim is false, Go, despite still being much younger and greatly unoptimized is already considerably faster than OCaml: http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?test=all...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by swannodette on Thursday May 05, 2011 @02:54PM (#2518507)
I'm asking about technical merits of one over the other, which you didn't respond to at all. And look at the overall scores on the 64bit one-core and quad-core benchmarks. OCaml is ahead.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by chc on Thursday May 05, 2011 @03:38PM (#2518653)
I'm looking at the overall scores on the 64-bit single-core and Go is six places ahead of OCaml. On the 64-bit quad, Go is five places ahead. The only one where OCaml appears to come close is single-core 32-bit, in which Go comes out one place ahead of OCaml.

(And just so we're clear: I actually like OCaml and have never used Go. So I'm not trying to wave some Go fanboy flag or anything. Those are just the numbers.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by igouy on Thursday May 05, 2011 @04:16PM (#2518755)
> six places ahead ... five places ahead ...

Those tables do not show a rank # by each programming language implementation because that might encourage people to make a completely bogus comparison!

(For example, six places rather than five just because one table includes an extra programming language - Clean.)

You're both being silly! "The numbers" for Go 6g and OCaml overlap and are quite similar.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by uriel on Thursday May 05, 2011 @04:09PM (#2518741)
I thought you were talking about performance, in which case the relevant chart is:

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/which-programming-lang...

Which shows Go is well ahead of OCaml.

The "which language is best" chart you linked has rather arbitrary weighting.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by igouy on Thursday May 05, 2011 @04:30PM (#2518795)
Both pages show "performance" - they show 2 different summary statistics of "performance".

> The "which language is best" chart you linked has rather arbitrary weighting.

That chart has exactly the same "weighting" as the chart you say is "the relevant chart"!

> Which shows Go is well ahead of OCaml.

Which shows the time measurements for those programs with Go 6g and OCaml completely overlap

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/which-programming-lang...

The time measurements are similar for both Go 6g and OCaml -

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/benchmark.php?test=all...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by igouy on Thursday May 05, 2011 @05:14PM (#2518934)
Did you downvote my reply instead of trying to justify your own comments ?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by chc on Thursday May 05, 2011 @05:21PM (#2518960)
You can't downvote replies to your own comments on Hacker News, so that seems unlikely unless he's sock-puppeting.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by burgerbrain on Thursday May 05, 2011 @04:56PM (#2518866)
You seem to be under the misunderstanding that simply because you asked a question that has a technical response it is not a troll.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:New stable release of Go by swannodette on Thursday May 05, 2011 @05:31PM (#2518988)
Half the responses were of the reasonable variety - "Not really much to say as far as technical merits - but it feels better to program in Go for me". Some brought up interesting similar projects. And others corrected my errors. Since when is sparking reasoned debate/discussion trolling?
[ Parent | on HN ]