Subject: Re: [executables] was: why Haskell hasn't replaced CL yet? From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.no> Date: 2000/03/03 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3161063857499252@naggum.no> * Samuel A. Falvo II | What part of this didn't you understand? why you can't figure out that start-up time from storage media is utterly and completely irrelevant when you start 50 processes within the same second. incidentally, I consider your question an instance of losing your temper. control your own temper, you hypocrite, or shut up about that of others! | The only point I saw was that you can launch 2 copies of ACL 25 times a | second each. this is obviously an unwarranted conclusion on your part, since it took 1.5 second user+system time and 1 second real time, and only user+system matters. you have no data to support your conclusion, but you do have data to support that I could fire up 33 instances a second on one CPU from this data. so I just wish you could engage your brain before you engage your agenda. | Are you for real? Why are you getting so upset? Why can't you conduct | yourself like an adult? What did I do to deserve the personal attacks on | me by you? Where have I attacked you? And what did I attack you with? you're being obnoxious, stupid, impenetrably dense, and behave like an asshole with an irrelevant axe to grind. that's what I object to. and now you can't even control your own temper. how sickeningly _pathetic_. | All I did was point out that there were ambiguities in the measurements made | due to certain "basic" assumptions. I'm not interested in the theoretical | performance of ACL. I'm interested in the real-world, down-to-Earth, | in-the-trenches performance of ACL. and that's what you got, dude. now, will you _ever_ be satisfied? #:Erik