[erlang-questions] benchmarks game harsh criticism

[Bengt Kleberg]

greetings,

isaac asked me a question. i could not see what relevance it had to the 
discussion. still, it might be relevant, so i asked how it was relevant. 
no answer from him so far.

this was the included email with the question. perhaps you did not see it?

On 11/23/07 23:44, Isaac Gouy wrote:
 > On Nov 23, 2007 1:26 PM, Bengt Kleberg wrote:
 >
 >> this is seriously off topic for erlang-questions, so i would
 > recommend
 >> each and every one of you to stop reading now.
 >
 > Was it off topic when you chose to air your criticism on
 > erlang-questions back in September, or is it only the reply to your
 > criticism that is off topic? :-)

what does this question have to do with the subject matter of this 
discussion?


--------------------------------------------------------------------
bengt
Those were the days...
    EPO guidelines 1978: "If the contribution to the known art resides
    solely in a computer program then the subject matter is not
    patentable in whatever manner it may be presented in the claims."


On 11/28/07 11:15, Joel Reymont wrote:
> Bengt,
> 
> FYI, I have no idea what the question is from the content that you 
> included ;-).
> 
> On Nov 28, 2007, at 8:10 AM, Bengt Kleberg wrote:
> 
>> greetings,
>>
>> just a clarification: my idea was for the shootout 
>> responsible/comitters to allow me to do more work for the shootout. 
>> not that the shootout responsible/comitters should do the work for me. 
>> i think we all agree on this, but i only wanted to make it perfectly 
>> clear.
>>
>> however, at this time i really would like for you, Isaac Gouy, to do 
>> more work when it comes to answering emails in this thread. it is not 
>> pressing, take your time, but i have one outstanding question that i 
>> would appreciate if you answered so that i may move on with the rest.
>> i have decided to limit the number of items (questions/statements) to 
>> 1 per post since otherwise the ones i regard as interesting gets 
>> ignored. in their place new ones spring up and propagate to such an 
>> extent that i loose track of the original thread. sorry about this, 
>> but i hope that quality comes before quantity for all parties 
>> interested in this discussion.
>>
>> the outstanding question is included below. i eagerly await your answer.
>>
>>
>> bengt
>> Those were the days...
>>   EPO guidelines 1978: "If the contribution to the known art resides
>>   solely in a computer program then the subject matter is not
>>   patentable in whatever manner it may be presented in the claims."
>>
>>
>> On 11/26/07 20:05, Isaac Gouy wrote:
>>> --- David Hopwood <david.hopwood@REDACTED> wrote:
>>> -snip-
>>>> As for the 'shootout', most of the criticisms of it in this thread
>>>> have been valid; it's not a very good basis for comparison of
>>> language
>>>> performance.
>>> Puzzled. afaict most of the comments in this thread have been about 
>>> benchmarks
>>> in general and not about the benchmarks game in particular, so the way
>>> you state your opinion is uninformative.
>>> And Bengt Kleberg's "criticism" is more of a complaint that we should
>>> do more.
>>>      
>>> ____________________________________________________________________________________ 
>>>
>>> Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
>>> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>>> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>> From: Bengt Kleberg <bengt.kleberg@REDACTED>
>> Date: November 26, 2007 7:18:00 AM GMT
>> To: erlang-questions@REDACTED
>> Subject: Re: [erlang-questions] benchmarks game harsh criticism (was 
>> Learning Erlang from the scratch)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/23/07 23:44, Isaac Gouy wrote:
>>> On Nov 23, 2007 1:26 PM, Bengt Kleberg wrote:
>>>> this is seriously off topic for erlang-questions, so i would
>>> recommend
>>>> each and every one of you to stop reading now.
>>> Was it off topic when you chose to air your criticism on
>>> erlang-questions back in September, or is it only the reply to your
>>> criticism that is off topic? :-)
>>
>> what does this question have to do with the subject matter of this 
>> discussion?
>>
>>
>> bengt
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>> http://www.erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
> 
> -- 
> http://wagerlabs.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
>