Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Insider News
  4. Hash Table Shootout 2: Rise of the Interpreter Machines

Hash Table Shootout 2: Rise of the Interpreter Machines

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Insider News
questioncsharppythonperlruby
1 Posts 1 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • T Offline
    T Offline
    Terrence Dorsey
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    LuaHashMap[^]:

    When writing LuaHashMap, the biggest question was always, "How is the performance?". The dogma is that it should be slow since it's going through an interpreter ("scripting language"). But wisdom demands benchmarks before making unsubstantiated claims.... So this seemed like a good basis to start a new round of benchmarks. But why stop at Lua? So let's do a whole suite of interpreted languages that would otherwise be dismissed. So I'm incorportating Lua, Python, Ruby, Perl, and Tcl.

    Interpreted "scripting" languages don't have to be slow. Here's why.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes


    • Login

    • Don't have an account? Register

    • Login or register to search.
    • First post
      Last post
    0
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • World
    • Users
    • Groups