From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson) Date: 2002-11-08T04:09:04+09:00 Subject: Re: [OT] Re: A vision for Parrot In article , A.M. Kuchling wrote: >In article , > Nikodemus Siivola wrote: >> 2) Using Parrot as a backend has speed as a carrot, ... > >It does? Upon what evidence? Since Parrot doesn't run any >languages yet, how can you claim it's faster than existing >implementations of those languages? > At the Ruby Conference last weekend Dan Sugalski gave a talk on Parrot. He showed a slide comparing the speed for counting down from 100million to 0 (or was it counting up to 100 million?) using various scripting languages (Ruby, Perl, Python). There were three Parrot versions impemented in Parrot assembly code - non-optimized, somewhat optimized and very optimized. As I recall, the scripting languages all took around 100 to 150 seconds. The worst of the Parrot versions took something like 18 seconds and the best did it in 4 seconds... That's a pretty dramatic difference, although it certainly isn't covering a lot of operations. At any rate, it seems to show that for counting the parrot VM's performance is quite good ;-) Phil