|
Your argument is my question is not a programming question. The fact is that one of the main reasons for people to choose a programming language is because of speed. We would not use C++ just because we like it, we choose C++ because it is fast, and this is a good discussion about why it is fast. For the same reason, it is good to discuss why should we choose java or C#, and why it is faster under some environment, like windows or linux. Is that Java is specific designed to be ran faster in linux so that it can make c# less competitive? This is a good discussion. All of these are very good discussion related to C# and I cannot see why this post should not be in this C# forum.
|
|
|
|
|
crunchor wrote: Your argument is my question is not a programming question.
Well it isn't, as I and a number of other CP regulars have tried to explain. If you cannot see that for yourself there is little more that we can do.
crunchor wrote: The fact is that one of the main reasons for people to choose a programming language is because of speed.
That is very rarely the reason these days.
crunchor wrote: This is a good discussion.
Perhaps, but it is still not a programming question, so it does not belong in this forum.
crunchor wrote: I cannot see why this post should not be in this C# forum.
There's none so blind ...
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
if speed is not an issue, then why would anyone use C++? It takes much longer time to develop the same thing comparing to c# and Java.
|
|
|
|
|
You really seem to understand absolutely nothing about software development.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
That must be you. You sound like you like to use c# but not c++ just because you like the character #.
|
|
|
|
|
crunchor wrote: You sound like you like to use c# but not c++ just because you like the character #.
You know absolutely nothing about me so don't make assumptions.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
Your talk shows you are priceless.
|
|
|
|
|
And what does C# use? What do you have to install to use your C# code on.
Oh, and I am much more familiar with the forums here than you are. I've been doing this for a very long time.
|
|
|
|
|
You are very funny because you assume too much.
|
|
|
|
|
Like what? That you can manage to get C# to run without .NET (or Mono). Go on, tell me how you can manage it without access to either of these frameworks at any stage.
Let's face it. Your argument is getting desperate so you are now trying to change what it's about. Sadly, you aren't funny.
|
|
|
|
|
it is funny that C# with .net or mono in windows/linux, all of these combination is still slower than Java under Java Virtual Machine in Linux, you sound like agree a lot from so many replies. I know you just want to tell me C# is just slower than Java in Linux no matter what do you deal with C#, interesting passion from you. You are such a java lover.
|
|
|
|
|
crunchor wrote: Less overhead in linux cannot be a reason for this case.
Simple; they're not the same language, do not load the same runtime, and the runtimes do not have the same settings.
What are you trying to achieve?
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You are discussing c#, that's good.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not a discussion; you specified a "problem/question", and I'd like to know where the problem/question is.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think there is one, he's descending into trollism (not to be confused with troilism[^]).
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: What are you trying to achieve
He is trying to achieve trolldom and succeeding very well. 
|
|
|
|
|
None of the values are constant and the comparisons are not valid because the two systems are different. One system may be faster than the other under these tests, but that does not prove anything. And finally, if you want more information on these figures then go and discuss it with the person who published them.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
crunchor wrote: Check out the replies over there of one of my posts.
OK, I have looked and it seems that you need to spend more time learning what is appropriate for each forum.
Use the best guess
|
|
|
|
|
crunchor wrote: how can this java faster than c# result happen?
"Overhead"; Ubuntu is a bit smaller, doesn't load as much on start. No side-by-side executables, no DEP, no WPF/Aero, no ActiveX. All the stuff that we pay for to avoid using Ubuntu
It'll also depend on the benchmark, and the quality of the implementation of the Mandelbrot in Java and C# - are they both as good as possible, or is one of them written while drunk? I assume you DO recognize all the algorithms used to test the systems?
Sorry, but I didn't see any surprises in the graph. What you can see is that .NET is faster than Java on Windows (what a surprise) and that Java is faster than .NET on Linux (again, expected).
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
My main concern is how can java+linux faster than C#+windows, very likely in the same server with same testing script just written in different language.
|
|
|
|
|
crunchor wrote: with same testing script just written in different language.
That makes them different scripts; one might be more efficient than the other.
crunchor wrote: how can java+linux faster than C#+windows
They're different OS'es, running different software; you didn't expect them to be equally fast, did you?
Like I said, Windows loads more. Try comparing Ubuntu to DSL, and there'll be another difference in speed; even when using MySQL and PHP on both, there'll be a difference in speed. Why? Because Ubuntu loads more background-services than DSL.
One doesn't choose a platform based on a few seconds difference in speed in a specific algo; server-performance is broader than the speed of a specific algo. Think of it this way; a webserver doesn't compute the Fibonacci every minute, it'd be more helped with a good caching-strategy.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
You are comparing apples and oranges here. You might as well ask which is faster, a cabbage or the complete works of Shakespeare?
The issue has nothing to do with the language, and everything to do with the operating system. That's what you should be looking at.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: You might as well ask which is faster, a cabbage or the complete works of Shakespeare?
Why, the cabbage of course...
(sorry Pete, couldn't resist, I'll go back into hiding now)
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, ask any teenager who has to study Shakespeare and they'll tell you they can throw the Shakespeare further and faster than they throw the cabbage.
|
|
|
|
|
Fundamentally, as others have pointed out, Linux is less bloated/feature rich* than Windows. If you test c++ under Linux and Windows, Linux is pretty much going to win. Why? Because Linux is doing less in the background,
Run java and c# on windows, c# wins: The JVM slows java down. Even without this MS will probably optimise .net and Windows against eachother, so without this factor you'd hope .net wins.
I've heard if you run Mono (a port of .net) on Linux against Java, Java wins. Why, I don't know I've never used mono. Probably mono is less optimised (it is a tiny project compared to Java). I don't even know how mono compiles.
The comparison you mention changes all the varibles, so it isn't a true test of the efficiencies of each framework.It does tell you, for speed Java on Linux wins over .net on Windows, but nothing about the relative efficiency of the two frameworks directly.
*Delete according to your prejudices
“Education is not the piling on of learning, information, data, facts, skills, or abilities - that's training or instruction - but is rather making visible what is hidden as a seed”
“One of the greatest problems of our time is that many are schooled but few are educated”
Sir Thomas More (1478 – 1535)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
