From ...
From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no>
Subject: Re: efficiency of Lisp compared to other progr. lang.?
Date: 1996/02/25
Message-ID: <19960225T100833Z@arcana.naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 141009241
references: <4goegv$hds@news1.usa.pipeline.com>
organization: Naggum Software; +47 2295 0313
newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp

[grantp@usa.pipeline.com(Pete)]

|   First, assuming skilled and experienced programmers, on a typical
|   system using a reasonable mix of io and computation, Lisp is quite
|   competitive to other OO systems.  It's true that it can't quite match
|   C++ and other strongly and statically typed languages, in terms of raw
|   speed, but it's not that far off.

is this true?  with CMU CL 17f and PCL, I get faster execution, less code,
and faster compilation than I do with C++ and templates using GCC 2.7.2.
if "raw speed" includes programmer time to achieve a working system, Lisp
_cannot_ lose.

#<Erik 3034231713743323>
-- 
the Internet made me do it