[Haskell-cafe] Re: Why can't Haskell be faster?

[Isaac Gouy]

--- Sebastian Sylvan <sebastian.sylvan at gmail.com> wrote:
-snip- 
> It still tells you how much content you can see on a given amount of
> vertical space.

And why would we care about that? :-)
 

> I think the point, however, is that while LOC is not perfect, gzip is
> worse.

How do you know? 

 
> > Best case you'll end up concluding that the added complexity had
> > no adverse effect on the results.

Best case would be seeing that the results were corrected against bias
in favour of long-lines, and ranked programs in a way that looks-right
when we look at the program source code side-by-side.


> It's completely arbitrary and favours languages wich requires
> you to write tons of book keeping (semantic noise) as it will
> compress down all that redundancy quite a bit (while the programmer
> would still has to write it, and maintain it).
> So gzip is even less useful than LOC, as it actively *hides* the very
> thing you're trying to meassure! You might as well remove it
> alltogether.

I don't think you've looked at any of the gz rankings, or compared the
source code for any of the programs :-)
 

> Or, as has been suggested, count the number of words in the program.
> Again, not perfect (it's possible in some languages to write things
> which has no whitespace, but is still lots of tokens).

Wouldn't that be "completely arbitrary"?


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com