15 Jan
1999
15 Jan
'99
12:28 a.m.
> Mind you, it's not a whopping lot faster, but
how it can be faster (by a
> few to five percent) is this: Larry Wall (who wrote Perl) optimized it in
> such a way that any ol' schmuck (like me) says "I could do this in
C!!!"
> and does so, but not as efficiently as Larry did... therefore, code in Perl
> is faster than the reworked version in C.
This isn't always true. When I wrote a
de-artifacter for images captured
from a video source, I wrote it first in PERL to prove to myself the
algorithm I conceived would work; I used PERL because I am more familiar
with it than any other language.
Later, I ported the program to C which netted me a
dramatic performance
increase: 15 minute processing times dropped to around a minute, while
CPU usage during the processing dropped from 100% to about 30%.
I guess you used a lot of low level calculations for
your job - and the speed of PERL comes only thru when
you need the offered high level funcionality. As more
low level you need, as more C is interesting, since
it offers nothing beside low level funcionality - and
when it comes to over all functionality of course
nothing can beat an Assembler (within a sophisticated
programming environment :).
Servus
Hans
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK