yeah, we're just better then awk!

Pierpaolo BERNARDI <>
Tue Mar 4 12:12:52 CET 2003

From: "Eric Merritt" <>

>  Yea the guy who did this has a comentary on Erlang
> that basically says the same think. That its a nice
> langauge and none of the tests are suited to its
> strengths. 

Hmmm...  I have been surprised by Erlang in a test 
which probably is as far from its strengths as possible.

I rewrote in Erlang a Common Lisp program which,
essentially, accesses repeatedly a big 2d array, 
and does some manipulations of short lists.

I obtain these times:

Clisp: 11/12s
HCL: 1.5/2s
Erlang using gb_trees as arrays: 32/34s
Erlang using an ets table as array: 7/8s

Clisp is a free CL that compiles to byte code.
HCL is a commercial CL compiling to native code.
Erlang is the byte code compiler, no Hipe.

I was expecting much worse results for Erlang.

Code available at

BTW, is there a better data structure to be used as an array
(i.e. a map from fixed length tuples of integers)?


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list