Subject: Re: Is LISP suited for neural networks From: Erik Naggum <erik@naggum.net> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 16:52:05 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3219065524055085@naggum.net> * hzi@uol.com.br | Is LISP suited for neural networks? | The old question: is it slow (since it was not designed with matrix algebra in mind | , as it says in <http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~mmv/15-381/spring97/prog4.html>)? | How does it compare with C/C++ for the task? Languages do not compare. Code written in them do not compare. Compiled with a particular compiler on a particular platform _might_ compare. You have not compared languages when you compared the execution times of your code, only _your_ competence in writing such code. Exceptionally fast code can be written in any language. The question is where the "line of convenience is" drawn. Common Lisp (and other Lisps in the past) have made it convenient to stop coding when the function performed its job _correctly_. C and C++ have made it convenient to stop coding when the function performed its job _quickly_. Unless you are willing to continue coding past the "line of convenience" to quick Common Lisp and correct C/C++ code, you are comparing apple-tree flowers and rotting oranges for edibility. The only interesting speed factor for _languages_ (as opposed to code written in them) is how much they slow down the programmer on his journey from problem to solution. /// --