yeah, we're just better then awk!

Jonathan Coupe <>
Tue Mar 4 12:35:20 CET 2003

> > > Also, the tests are very small tests that only test
> > > simple operations.  Nearly all languages have about
> > > the same number of lines of code, each test does no
> > > useful work,
> >
> > are we talking about ?
> > most of the tests there do real work (ex: word count, sorting,
> > reversing, adding numbers) on file contents.
> Yes.  I guess I consider that although this is real work, in
> the grand scheme of what most computing is today, they are
> overtly simple.

Bagley does call this a ***scripting*** language shootout, where script == a
short program that reads in a text file, does something to it, and then
exits. Within these terms of reference the benchmarks seem well chosen. And
he does note - or maybe I'm thinking of the twin Windows shootout site -
that Erlang is designed for a completely different set of tasks, and that
his benchmarks don't measure its strengths.

> > Its also unfairly biased against apps
> > that can startup/shutdown very fast, which both
> > Java and Erlang don't do well.

Should "can" have been "can't"?

- Jonathan Coupe

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list