«

Razii <> wrote:

<snip>

> So we are done with this partialsums benchmark; this was the only case
> where C# was significantly faster.

And I for one have never been claiming that .NET or C# is significantly
faster than Java overall. (If any benchmarks made custom calls to
native code, that would be interesting. I really have no idea how JNI
compares with P/Invoke in terms of speed. I know which is more pleasant
to use, mind you

Given how similar their overall approach is, and how both of them have
had a lot of time and money spent optimising their VMs (with more work
to be done, for sure) it's unsurprising that they're pretty much a tie.

My conclusion: don't choose between Java and .NET on performance
grounds. There are far better reasons to choose one or the other,
depending on other criteria.

--
Jon Skeet - <>
Web site: http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
C# in Depth: http://csharpindepth.com

Razii wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:07:29 +0100, Jon Skeet [C# MVP]
> <> wrote:
>
>> Oh indeed. The fact that there's both Math and StrictMath is
>> particularly nice. It would be interesting to see a port of StrictMath
>> for .NET.
>
> Since 1.4 Math just calls StrictMath for sin and cos. That's how sin
> and cos got slower since 1.4. However, there is solution to it.
>
> http://pastebin.com/f126f0c27
>

That might be what appears in the library source, but it isn't what
actually happens once a call has been compiled.

Mark Thornton

Razii wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:49:20 +0100, Jon Skeet [C# MVP]
> <> wrote:
>> into the search bar, you get 0.858272132, the same as the .NET answer.
>> That can't be pure coincidence, but I've no idea where the similarity
>> is...
>
> That's pretty simple to explain. Both use hardware for angle reduction
> and get the same wrong answer. That's why it's faster but wrong. It's
> not just 1e15
>
> What about these?
>
> Console.WriteLine(Math.Sin (1e7));
>
> 0.420547793190771 (C# with .NET)
> 0.42054779319078249129850658974095 (right answer)
>
> Console.WriteLine(Math.Sin (1e10));
>
> -0.48750602507627 (C# with .NET)
> -0.48750602508751069152779429434811 (right answer)
>
> I am sure there are better examples but the point is made.

Everybody knows there is this effect. Maybe everybody except Jon H.

But does it matter ?

I don't think there will be that many usages where the differences in
accuracy between the Java way and the C# way will have much impact.

Either it will be good enough or even greater precision will be needed.

Arne

Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> Arguable in the case of Java. The Java Language Specification says that
> each compilation unit implicitly starts with an import of "the
> predefined package java.lang".
>
> I don't know whether C# has any libraries with such a privileged position.

There is no implicit import of namespace System.

But I am not sure that I consider that a big difference.

Both Java and C# are pretty married to their libraries anyway.

Arne

Mark Thornton wrote:
> Jon Skeet [C# MVP] wrote:
>> The VM spec is also separate from the language spec, which is a good
>> thing. It's just a shame that the name "Java" applies to the platform,
>> the runtime, and the language.
> And at times several other things with no obvious relationship at the
> whim of Sun's marketing department.

I guess you can argue that funding Java development and giving most
of it away for free has given them the right to try and make a few
bucks selling a Java branded Linux.

Arne

Jon Skeet [C# MVP] wrote:
> Razii <> wrote:
>> So we are done with this partialsums benchmark; this was the only case
>> where C# was significantly faster.
>
> And I for one have never been claiming that .NET or C# is significantly
> faster than Java overall. (If any benchmarks made custom calls to
> native code, that would be interesting. I really have no idea how JNI
> compares with P/Invoke in terms of speed. I know which is more pleasant
> to use, mind you
>
> Given how similar their overall approach is, and how both of them have
> had a lot of time and money spent optimising their VMs (with more work
> to be done, for sure) it's unsurprising that they're pretty much a tie.
>
> My conclusion: don't choose between Java and .NET on performance
> grounds. There are far better reasons to choose one or the other,
> depending on other criteria.

Jon - that is common sense - completely off topic in this thread !



Arne