Isaac Gouy wrote:
> 
> As I said - There isn't a problem with benchmarks per-se; there can be
> a problem with how one chooses to interpret benchmarks.

That's a meaningless distinction.  You are suggesting that people who 
read your benchmarks will somehow interpret them and find information 
that is simply not there.  The benchmarks paint an overly simplified 
picture, nothing more.  The only way to interpret the numbers correctly 
is to ignore them and look for more pragmatic examples.

I do think there is some small value in the comparitive coding samples, 
but the rigidity of the rules means that there is very little ingenuity 
allowed in the code, and thus all the code ends up looking extremely 
similar, regardless of the language employed.  If you enjoy probing 
variations in whitespace and the placement of semi-colons, you will have 
lots of fun.

> Faster to develop-in than what other languages - Smalltalk? Lisp?
> Mathematica?

Faster to develop in than C++, Perl, Java, Forth, Assembler, and indeed, 
Lisp.  God help you if you decide to implement a web framework or a 
compiler in Mathematica.

The real problem with the alioth benchmarks is that they are run by 
amateurs that allow themselves to be bound by rigid pseudo-academic 
dogma, but they can't research and fix trivial problems on their own, 
and then they whine when nobody does it for them.  If you guys aren't 
highly motivated to fix things, why do you think the rest of us will be?

I gave up on them a while ago.

-- 
Glenn Parker | glenn.parker-AT-comcast.net | <http://www.tetrafoil.com/>