I've looked at the performance data at
http://www.concentric.net/~Dgirle/Smalltalk/Performance.html
and it is very strange to see that Squeak has performance that is two orders of magnitude worse than all the other systems for stringCompare. Any idea why?
Juan Cires Martinez wrote:
I've looked at the performance data at
http://www.concentric.net/~Dgirle/Smalltalk/Performance.html
and it is very strange to see that Squeak has performance that is two orders of magnitude worse than all the other systems for stringCompare. Any idea why?
I guess the stringCompare is implemented as a primitve in the other system. As far as I can remember this is the case in Visualworks.
Since I don't have yet any Smalltalk on my new system yet I cannot check how is it done in Squeak.
Markus
Juan -
I've looked at the performance data at
http://www.concentric.net/~Dgirle/Smalltalk/Performance.html
and it is very strange to see that Squeak has performance that is two orders of magnitude worse than all the other systems for stringCompare.
F.Y.I., version 2.0 (beta this Friday, final two weeks later) has a primitive in it for string compare. It is compiled from Squeak, and it accepts a third argument which specifies the collation order. Thus the same primitive serves for case-sensitive as well as case-insensitive comparisons. It should certainly improve the stringCompare statistic.
- Dan
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org