Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.java,comp.lang.c++
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!world!news
From: moresys@world.std.com (More Systems Employee)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk slower than C++
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
Message-ID: <DrGp07.J36@world.std.com>
Sender: news@world.std.com (Mr Usenet Himself)
Nntp-Posting-Host: world.std.com
Organization: MORE Systems, inc.
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.7
References: <3177048B.2CBD@alumni.caltech.edu> <4l8cqd$3eh@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <4lggn6$2nr@hermes.dna.mci.com> <317CD94B.7725@bnr.ca> <4m7rda$bqa@thx1138.ny.jpmorgan.com> <31878E85.4146@bnr.ca> <gscottDqr5su.45E@netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 19:33:43 GMT
Lines: 27
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.smalltalk:38767 comp.lang.java:50384 comp.lang.c++:189737

In article <gscottDqr5su.45E@netcom.com>, gscott@netcom.com says...
>
>CK Wong (wongck@bnr.ca) wrote:
>: I am talking environment.  I am not talking the code executed.
>: In VW the clock is advance by a clock signal handler. When you
>: want to get the time, you just get the in memory copy of the current
>: time. However, in C, you have to make a system call to get the
>: time. The overhead of system call is much higher than a read
>: in smalltalk.
>
>As much as I hate to post an inflamatory message to a language holy
>war crossposted to three comp.lang groups...
>
>Phoey! You have picked a special case where you know that VW just
>happens to do something that will make it look better.  If this 
>Clock is not the standard system clock, then the 'signal handler'
>that is updating it in memory *constantly* will probably eat up
>more of the machine than the C calls will.  It's just that this 
>time is hidden from your benchmark.

No, I could see how an interrupt-driven timer might be more efficient,
particularly when an application calls for determining the time
very frequently (the given example was an extreme case of such a need.)
On the other hand, there is nothing stopping a good C programmer from
writing their own interrupt-driven timer routine using exactly the
same principles, without the overhead of the rest of Smalltalk.

