Quote:
Without leveraging optimizations in Apple's Xcode tool set, Splasm found that Swift was between six and 40 times slower than Objective-C, Splasm official Keith Gugliotto said. " ... Even after turning on the optimizations, Splasm found that Swift ran 10 to 20 percent slower than the original test numbers in some cases and 10 to 20 percent faster in other cases. But Swift was still slower than Objective-C.
Benchmarks without the compiler optimizations turned on are worthless. The only value this have is as clickbait. Oh wait... 1) Do "original test numbers" refer to the objective C benchmarks or the un-optimized swift benchmarks? That's a huge difference in performance between the two but the article doesn't tell you which or give an easy way to find out because... 2) It breaks the cardinal rule of web news by talking about splasm's benchmarks but not linking to them. Splasm's benchmarks[^] are Googleable though. Enabling optimization to both builds resulted in order of magnitude shifts in relative performance; but the closest swift ever came to obj-C was 6.4x slower. With Android using Java that's only ~2x slower than native code in typical cases, unless Apple can make some really big optimization gains to the toolchain their newest and shinyest has performance poor enough that they risk the internet snark gallery abusing iOS apps as being slow and laggy compared to the competition in the future. :doh:
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
