Re: Performance

["Matt Holmes" <kerion@...>]

I am sure this may be the case in some applications, but in very heavy
processing applications, I would have to think that the margin of overhead
would start to grow. Especially in cases where the processor was being
utilized at 100% of its capacity (though, admittedly, this is very rare with
modern 1+ ghz processors).

Matt Holmes

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Burgess" <david@spinifex.net>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br>
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 4:35 PM
Subject: Re: Performance


> I have benchmarked (for a client application) LUA and SmallC
> against using C++.
>
> Both LUA and SmallC (SmallC won by a small margin), provided
> neglible overhead against using native C++.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Chris.Kaiser@peoplefirst.com>
> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2001 5:47 AM
> Subject: RE: Performance
>
>
> One good reason why, and one that I need, is to convince management
> that its a worthy solution to some dynamic code generation problems.
>
> My boss wants me to generate compiled C++ on the fly based on the
> user communities mods. We're to build a series of tools to enable
> the user community to change the business rules on the fly. I'd like
> for these rules to be generated in lua and parsed from our C++ engine.
> But I need to convince him that it will be fast enough.
>
> Chris
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Passaniti [mailto:jpass@rochester.rr.com]
> > Sent: Monday, November 05, 2001 3:07 PM
> > To: Multiple recipients of list
> > Subject: RE: Performance
> >
> >
> > > Can someone point me to some performance
> > > comparisons of Lua vs C++?
> >
> > Can we ask why?  What question are you trying to answer?
> >
>
>
>