Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mixolydianagain 17 days ago
> to more performant runtimes and architectures in response to operational concerns at scale, which have a tenuous link to language

The runtime performance and the language are deeply linked. None of the dynamically typed runtimes you mention are actually performance competitive with JVM languages.

3 comments

Luajit and SBCL are very much performance competitive with the JVM? Why do you say that they're not?

Random example benchmark: https://madnight.github.io/benchmarksgame/lisp.html

That's someone's 8 year old mirror of the benchmarks game website.

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

These mean nothing. The C/C++ implementations use SIMD intrinsic while Lisp doesn't (it should have used sb-simd).
Huh. And after eight years, SBCL and Java are side by side, still.
> Huh.

The hardware changed.

The way measurements were made changed.

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

The Java version changed.

The SBCL version changed.

> side by side

You'd have to say what you mean by that.

> You'd have to say what you mean by that.

They appear, literally, side by side, in the list. That is, they were competitive eight years ago. They are still competitive today.

By design, the 8 year old page you linked presented Lisp measurements side-by-side against Java measurements (by excluding the other programs).

There's overlap across most of the different language implementations:

https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

They absolutely are. Maybe not if the only thing you’re benchmarking is something completely CPU bound like signal processing/math, but they’re definitely competitive for tons of real use cases.
They don’t really need to be though. They take far fewer tokens and are still faster to develop with