Am 02.11.2004 um 22:42 schrieb Andreas Raab:

> Besides, one of the more interesting things to do is to not use 
> "long/int" but rather the Object integer type.

Yep. On my machine the speed then is almost equal. Mind you, Squeak 
Interpreter vs. Java JIT:

	| x |
	x := 0.
	(Time millisecondsToRun: [
		1 to: 2 do: [: i|
			1 to: 100000000 do: [:j | x := x + 1]]]) -> x

80244->200000000

=================

class Numtest
{
     public static void main(String args[]) {
	Long x;
	Long timeStart;
        Integer one = new Integer(1);
	
	x = new Long(0);
	timeStart = new Long(System.currentTimeMillis());
	
	for (Integer i = new Integer(0); i.intValue() < 2; i=new 
Integer(i.intValue()+one.intValue())) {
	    for (Integer j = new Integer(0); j.intValue() < 100000000; j=new 
Integer(j.intValue()+one.intValue())) {
		x = new Long(x.longValue() + one.longValue());
	    }
	}
	
	timeStart = new Long(System.currentTimeMillis() - 
timeStart.longValue());
	System.out.println(timeStart.toString());
	System.out.println(x.toString());
     }
}

% java -version
java version "1.4.2_05"
Java(TM) 2 Runtime Environment, Standard Edition (build 1.4.2_05-141.3)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 1.4.2-38, mixed mode)
% javac Numtest.java && java Numtest
66851
200000000

==============

Squeak: 80 seconds
Java: 66 seconds

Meaning they are almost equal, with Java being faster by 20%, but by 
not several orders of magnitude. Not bad for a pure Interpreter, I'd 
say. Would be interesting to try with Auto-Boxing/Unboxing, but I don't 
have a newer Java version installed.

- Bert -