RE: [Caml-list] Great Programming Language Shootout Revived

["Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com>]

Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
>
> I think token count is the most objective measure from measures which
> are reasonably easy to take automatically. If not token count, then
> line count, and finally character count.

I don't suppose you guys would consider moving this discussion to
comp.benchmarks?  Not so much that it's off-topic on caml-list - I don't
care.  Rather, there's this whole community that deals with all these
"are tokens or LOCs better?" issues in exceeding detail, and you're only
repeating what's been done to death in their archives.  If you actually
want to design a 'better' language benchmarker, this would be your ideal
watering hole.

Personally I think the idea of 'token counts' is silly, just not as
silly as LOC.  How would you ever objectively define the semantic value
of a 'token' ?  What if my tokens are more dense with information than
your tokens?  Anyways, my question is rhetorical.  I suggest
comp.benchmarks.


Cheers,                         www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every               Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.708 / Virus Database: 464 - Release Date: 6/18/2004

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners