Namespace problem

[tech]

Hi, i have the following problem

In file1.h

namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();

};

}
In file2.h

class Bar;

class User
{

Bar* pBar;

};
In file2.cpp

#include "file2.h"
#include "file1.h"

User::func()
{

pBar = new Bar;
pBar->foo(); // linker error here
}
If i try to forward declare in file2.h like this

class A::Bar i get a compiler error saying that A is not a class or
namespace
with MSVC++8.

How to solve this issue.

[Martin T.]

tech wrote:

Hi, i have the following problem

In file1.h

namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();

};

}
In file2.h

class Bar;

class User
{

Bar* pBar;

};
In file2.cpp

#include "file2.h"
#include "file1.h"

User::func()
{

pBar = new Bar;
pBar->foo(); // linker error here
}
If i try to forward declare in file2.h like this

class A::Bar i get a compiler error saying that A is not a class or
namespace
with MSVC++8.

How to solve this issue.

I think you have to reopen the namespace:

namespace A {
class Bar;
}

class User {
A::Bar* pBar;
}

br,
Martin

[Victor Bazarov]

tech wrote:

Hi, i have the following problem

In file1.h

namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();

};

}
In file2.h

Add

namespace A {

>
class Bar;

Add

}

>
class User
{

Bar* pBar;

};
In file2.cpp

#include "file2.h"
#include "file1.h"

User::func()
{

pBar = new Bar;
pBar->foo(); // linker error here
}
If i try to forward declare in file2.h like this

class A::Bar i get a compiler error saying that A is not a class or
namespace
with MSVC++8.

How to solve this issue.

You have to tell the compiler that 'A' is a namespace.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[tech]

Hi, thanks now i have another problem though

In file1.h
namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();
};
}

file1.cpp

namespace A
{
Bar::Bar()
{
}
}
In file2.h
namespace A {
class Bar;
}

class User
{
A::Bar* pBar;

};
In file2.cpp

#include "file2.h"
#include "file1.h"
User::func()
{

pBar = new A::Bar;
pBar->foo();

}
Now i have compiler error saying Bar has no default constructor

[Victor Bazarov]

tech wrote:

Hi, thanks now i have another problem though

In file1.h
namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();
};
}

file1.cpp

namespace A
{
Bar::Bar()
{
}
}

Uh... This doesn't see right. The definition of A::Bar class
has the only function, named 'foo' in it. And the implementation
file for some reason attempts to define the default constructor
that you didn't declare.

>

In file2.h
namespace A {
class Bar;
}

class User
{
A::Bar* pBar;

};
In file2.cpp

#include "file2.h"
#include "file1.h"
User::func()
{

pBar = new A::Bar;
pBar->foo();

}
Now i have compiler error saying Bar has no default constructor

Post your *actual* code.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Razii]

Well, as I must find something new to do..
http://razi2.blogspot.com/2008/04/sh...arks-game.html

The site at

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

has many computer languages performance on a same few dozen
benchmarks.

For some reason, the java compiled with Jet is not on the site. I
asked him to add Jet to the list, and he gave a really odd excuse
about "license" restrictions. There is nothing in Jet license that
restricts him from posting benchmark results (it's been done on many
web sites). Later he gave even a more weird excuse that they will have
to link to the Jet web page if they include Jet results. Huh? Why
would that be a problem? They already link to every compiler used in
the shootout. The number one ranked compiler on their list is Intel
C++ compiler which is a commercial product (
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...=all&lang=icpp
). They link to Intel C++ compiler.

Well, since they refused to add what is commonly claimed (we will see)
to be the fastest java compiler, I will run g++ vs jet on my computer
(using the same code that they have and similar flags that they use
for g++). We can then estimate where Jet would rank on their
(incomplete) list .

What I am using:
gcc version 4.3.0 (GCC TDM-2 for MinGW)
Jet version: 6.4 beta
http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jetdlbeta.html

To record time, I downloaded Cygwin and used "time" command. The
output is directed to >/dev/null

Starting today:
binary-trees benchmark
(C++ version)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...&lang=gpp&id=2

(java version)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...lang=java&id=2

g++ -pipe -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions binarytrees.cpp
-o binarytrees.exe -march=native

jc -inline+ binarytrees.class

Time in secs as N increases
N 12 14 16
g++ 0.442s 2.343s 13.743s
JVM 0.185s 0.339s 1.281s (-server -Xms64m)
JET 0.284s 0.506s 1.528s

Weird, very weird. According to their site, g++ is 1.6 times faster
than JVM but I don't get the same result using the same source that
they have on their site. With n=13, g++ is 7.5 times slower. huh?
Why? In any case, JVM is faster than JET in this benchmark anyway.

Next benchmark: fannkuch

(coming next).

[Razii]

Well, as I must find something new to do.
http://razi2.blogspot.com/2008/04/sh...arks-game.html

The site at:
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

has many computer languages performance on a same few dozen
benchmarks.

For some reason, the java compiled with Jet is not on the site. I
asked him to add Jet to the list, and he gave a really odd excuse
about "license" restrictions. There is nothing in Jet license that
restricts him from posting benchmark results (it's been done on many
web sites). Later he gave even a more weird excuse that they will have
to link to the Jet web page if they include Jet results. Huh? Why
would that be a problem? They already link to every compiler used in
the shootout. The number one ranked compiler on their list is Intel
C++ compiler which is a commercial product (
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...=all&lang=icpp
). They link to Intel C++ compiler.

Well, since they refused to add what is commonly claimed (we will see)
to be the fastest java compiler, I will run g++ vs jet on my computer
(using the same code that they have and similar flags that they use
for g++). We can then estimate where Jet would rank on their
(incomplete) list .

What I am using:
gcc version 4.3.0 (GCC TDM-2 for MinGW)
Jet version: 6.4 beta
http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jetdlbeta.html

To record time, I downloaded Cygwin and used "time" command. The
output is directed to >/dev/null

Starting today:
binary-trees benchmark
(C++ version)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...&lang=gpp&id=2

(java version)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...lang=java&id=2

g++ -pipe -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions binarytrees.cpp
-o binarytrees.exe -march=native

jc -inline+ binarytrees.class

Time in secs as N increases....
N 12 14 16
g++ 0.442s 2.343s 13.743s
JVM 0.185s 0.339s 1.281s (-server -Xms64m)
JET 0.284s 0.506s 1.528s

Weird, very weird. According to their site, g++ is 1.6 times faster
than JVM but I don't get the same result using the same source that
they have on their site. With n=13, g++ is 7.5 times slower. huh?
Why? In any case, JVM is faster than JET in this benchmark anyway.

Next benchmark: fannkuch
coming next
(.........)

[Bo Persson]

Razii wrote:

>
Time in secs as N increases
N 12 14 16
g++ 0.442s 2.343s 13.743s
JVM 0.185s 0.339s 1.281s (-server -Xms64m)
JET 0.284s 0.506s 1.528s

Weird, very weird. According to their site, g++ is 1.6 times faster
than JVM but I don't get the same result using the same source that
they have on their site. With n=13, g++ is 7.5 times slower. huh?
Why? In any case, JVM is faster than JET in this benchmark anyway.

Why don't you just link to the binary-trees result page, so we can all
start using Haskell, ML, Lisp, and Basic for our high performance
programs?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...trees&lang=all
Must be a bad benchmark, as Java 6 -server is at 16th place!
Bo Persson

[Martin Gregorie]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:27:02 -0500, Razii wrote:

Starting today:
binary-trees benchmark
(C++ version)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...&lang=gpp&id=2

(java version)
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...lang=java&id=2

g++ -pipe -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions binarytrees.cpp -o
binarytrees.exe -march=native

jc -inline+ binarytrees.class

Time in secs as N increases....
N 12 14 16
g++ 0.442s 2.343s 13.743s
JVM 0.185s 0.339s 1.281s (-server -Xms64m) JET 0.284s
0.506s 1.528s

Weird, very weird. According to their site, g++ is 1.6 times faster than
JVM but I don't get the same result using the same source that they have
on their site. With n=13, g++ is 7.5 times slower. huh? Why? In any
case, JVM is faster than JET in this benchmark anyway.

There's a hidden factor here: you're not just benchmarking languages and
compilers. You're comparing operating systems as well and doing it with an
algorithm that is hammering memory management.

In this case you're comparing Gentoo Linux against an undeclared edition
of Windows. Linux, like all Unices, is pretty slick at memory management.
It has to be because its design requires it to be fast at spawning
processes and tidying up after they die. UNIX assumes that a lot of small
short life processes are likely to be involved in doing any significant
task while Windows tends to use a single, monolithic program to do the
same job. Things may have changed in the more recent Windows releases, but
in the past its memory management has been spectacularly bad: both slow
and leak-prone.

Binary tree programs tend to allocate small pieces of memory each time a
new node is added to the tree. If, as is likely, the C++ implementation
calls the OS each time it adds a node to the tree while the JVM only asks
the OS for large memory chunks which it internally slices into tree nodes,
then I'd expect the Java process to be a lot faster than the C++ under
Windows. Gentoo memory management is likely to have a similar efficiency
to the JVM, so the website's performance difference could easily be down
to just the JIT and GC overheads.

I strongly suspect that you're seeing the difference in memory management
speeds between Linux and Windows and that this is big enough to mask any
other performance differences between Java and C++.
--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. |
org | Zappa fan & glider pilot

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 19, 8:27 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

Well, as I must find something new to do.http://razi2.blogspot.com/2008/04/sh...enchmarks-game...

The site at:http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

has many computer languages performance on a same few dozen
benchmarks.

For some reason, the java compiled with Jet is not on the site. I
asked him to add Jet to the list, and he gave a really odd excuse
about "license" restrictions. There is nothing in Jet license that
restricts him from posting benchmark results (it's been done on many
web sites).

We don't have a JET license.

Excelsior JET non-commercial licensing is conditional - "Authors of
non-commercial Java software willing to exchange links and/or
otherwise promore Excelsior JET are welcome to apply for a free
license."
http://www.excelsior-usa.com/jetpricing.html#non-comm

The fact that others break Excelsior JET license conditions is not a
justification for us to break those license conditions.

Later he gave even a more weird excuse that they will have
to link to the Jet web page if they include Jet results. Huh? Why
would that be a problem? They already link to every compiler used in
the shootout. The number one ranked compiler on their list is Intel
C++ compiler which is a commercial product (http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...php?test=all&l...
). They link to Intel C++ compiler.

Well, since they refused to add what is commonly claimed (we will see)
to be the fastest java compiler, I will run g++ vs jet on my computer
(using the same code that they have and similar flags that they use
for g++). We can then estimate where Jet would rank on their
(incomplete) list .

What I am using:
gcc version 4.3.0 (GCC TDM-2 for MinGW)
Jet version: 6.4 betahttp://www.excelsior-usa.com/jetdlbeta.html

To record time, I downloaded Cygwin and used "time" command. The
output is directed to >/dev/null

Starting today:
binary-trees benchmark
(C++ version)http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=binarytrees&...

(java version)http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=binarytrees&...

g++ -pipe -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer -finline-functions binarytrees.cpp
-o binarytrees.exe -march=native

jc -inline+ binarytrees.class

Time in secs as N increases....
N 12 14 16
g++ 0.442s 2.343s 13.743s
JVM 0.185s 0.339s 1.281s (-server -Xms64m)
JET 0.284s 0.506s 1.528s

Weird, very weird. According to their site, g++ is 1.6 times faster
than JVM but I don't get the same result using the same source that
they have on their site. With n=13, g++ is 7.5 times slower. huh?
Why? In any case, JVM is faster than JET in this benchmark anyway.

Different hardware.

Cygwin not Linux

Different gcc.

Windows JVM or Linux JVM?

Next benchmark: fannkuch
coming next
(.........)

[ldv]

On Apr 20, 11:12 pm, Isaac Gouy <[e-mail]:

We don't have a JET license.

Excelsior JET non-commercial licensing is conditional

Did you ask Excelsior for a free license? If yes, did they refuse?

I know for sure they are used to provide free licenses under
conditions other than those you quoted, e.g. to beta testers, and,
guess to whom, to people conducting Java performance studies.

I also recall that, say, the IBM JDK license used to specifically
prohibit publication of benchmark results... Have you reviewed the
licenses of all products you are comparing?

LDV

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 20, 9:36 am, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]:

On Apr 20, 11:12 pm, Isaac Gouy <[e-mail]:

We don't have a JET license.

Excelsior JET non-commercial licensing is conditional

Did you ask Excelsior for a free license? If yes, did they refuse?

I haven't asked, I'm not interested in promoting Excelsior JET as a
condition of using it non-commercially.

I know for sure they are used to provide free licenses under
conditions other than those you quoted, e.g. to beta testers, and,
guess to whom, to people conducting Java performance studies.

I also recall that, say, the IBM JDK license used to specifically
prohibit publication of benchmark results... Have you reviewed the
licenses of all products you are comparing?

We certainly try to keep up with the changing license conditions. I
removed the Intel compiler measurements when it seemed that the
license forbade publication of benchmark measurements - and now it's
clear that the license for the current non-commercial versions does
not forbid publication of benchmark measurements we are showing the
Intel compilers once more.

Incidentally 4 of the Intel C++ programs don't seem to have the
correct compiler options

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...cpp&lang2=icpp

I'd welcome advice on how to fix them.

[Chris Thomasson]

"Razii" <wh**********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:12********************************@4ax.com...

Well, as I must find something new to do..
http://razi2.blogspot.com/2008/04/sh...arks-game.html

The site at

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

[...]

Try this one Razii

http://pastebin.com/m5a125c7b
Alls this does is attach special allocator's (region and slab) to the
following test:

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...&lang=gpp&id=2
It performs MUCH better. It should beat Java.

WARNING*

The allocators are not general purpose, there were designed for this test.

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 09:36:09 -0700 (PDT), "ld*@mail.com"
<ld*@mail.comwrote:

>I also recall that, say, the IBM JDK license used to specifically
prohibit publication of benchmark results... Have you reviewed the
licenses of all products you are comparing?

The excuse is bogus. The part that he is quoting only applies to
distributing executables compiled with Jet. In shootout web page, they
are not distributing compiled binaries. They are only posting
benchmark numbers. There is nothing in the license that he quoted that
says you can't quote benchmark results by testing the trial version.

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:49:37 -0700, "Chris Thomasson"
<cr*****@comcast.netwrote:

>Try this one Razii

http://pastebin.com/m5a125c7b
Alls this does is attach special allocator's (region and slab) to the
following test:

No, it doesn't beat java version because it crashes with n 14. In
any case, in this thread the topic is the incomplete shootout site.

[Chris Thomasson]

"Razii" <wh**********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:v8********************************@4ax.com...

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:49:37 -0700, "Chris Thomasson"
<cr*****@comcast.netwrote:

>>Try this one Razii

http://pastebin.com/m5a125c7b
Alls this does is attach special allocator's (region and slab) to the
following test:

No, it doesn't beat java version because it crashes with n 14.

Yup. Oh well. The slab allocator does not work here.

In
any case, in this thread the topic is the incomplete shootout site.

[Roedy Green]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:27:02 -0500, Razii <wh**********@hotmail.com>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>For some reason, the java compiled with Jet is not on the site. I
asked him to add Jet to the list, and he gave a really odd excuse
about "license" restrictions. There is nothing in Jet license that
restricts him from posting benchmark results (it's been done on many
web sites). Later he gave even a more weird excuse that they will have
to link to the Jet web page if they include Jet results. Huh? Why
would that be a problem? They already link to every compiler used in
the shootout. The number one ranked compiler on their list is Intel
C++ compiler which is a commercial product (
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...=all&lang=icpp
). They link to Intel C++ compiler.

you can download the trial version of the Jet compiler which generates
code just like the production one and run the benchmarks yourself.
see http://mindprod.com/jgloss/jet.html
--

Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
The Java Glossary
http://mindprod.com

[Chris Thomasson]

"Razii" <wh**********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:v8********************************@4ax.com...

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 11:49:37 -0700, "Chris Thomasson"
<cr*****@comcast.netwrote:

>>Try this one Razii

http://pastebin.com/m5a125c7b
Alls this does is attach special allocator's (region and slab) to the
following test:

No, it doesn't beat java version because it crashes with n 14. In
any case, in this thread the topic is the incomplete shootout site.

Sorry about that non-sense Razii. Perhaps I can try again when I get some
free time.

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:57:30 +0200, "Bo Persson" <bo*@gmb.dkwrote:

>Must be a bad benchmark, as Java 6 -server is at 16th place!

There is another problem with the shootout site. The site forces the
java version to either use only -server or use only -Xms64m flag.

C++ version uses different flags with different benchmarks. There are
not zillion of c++ benchmarks, one with only -O2 flag and one with O3
flag for example. However, the shootout site does this with java. That
sounds pretty bogus. Why restrict java to use only -server or only
-Xms64? Only one java benchmark that uses different flags (depending
on what flags produce best result with a particular benchmark) should
be posted (just as C++ benchmark does).

In this benchmark, combining -Xms64m and -server produce best result

when n = 16

4.478s (when only -server flag is used)
1.286s ((when both -server flag and -Xms64 is combined).

Already 4 times faster

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 15:40:06 -0500, Razii <wh**********@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>In this benchmark, combining -Xms64m and -server produce best result

when n = 16

4.478s (when only -server flag is used)
1.286s ((when both -server flag and -Xms64 is combined).

In this benchmark (since it's dependent on GC performance), adding the
flag -XX:NewRatio=1 can further improve the result. This is not so
obvious with n = 16 but with n = 18, you can see the difference.

time java -server binarytrees 18 (only using -server flag)

Time: 11.316s

$ time java -server -Xms64m binarytrees 18 (both -Xms64m and -server)

Time: 0m9.162s

$ time java -server -Xms64m -XX:NewRatio=1 binarytrees 18 (NewRatio 1)
Time: 0m6.105s

Moreover, with n = 18 increasing the total access to memory even
further improves the result with this benchmark

$ time java -server -Xms128m -Xmx128m -XX:NewRatio=1 binarytrees 18

Time: 0m4.575s

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:24:31 -0500, Razii <wh**********@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>
time java -server binarytrees 18 (only using -server flag)

Time: 11.316s

$ time java -server -Xms64m binarytrees 18 (both -Xms64m and -server)

Time: 0m9.162s

$ time java -server -Xms64m -XX:NewRatio=1 binarytrees 18 (NewRatio 1)
Time: 0m6.105s

Moreover, with n = 18 increasing the total access to memory even
further improves the result with this benchmark

$ time java -server -Xms128m -Xmx128m -XX:NewRatio=1 binarytrees 18

Time: 0m4.575s

there is also the flag

-XX:+AggressiveHeap

This option instructs the JVM to push memory use to the limit: some
GC activity is done in parallel (no Xmx or Xms flags with this option)

$ time java -server -XX:+AggressiveHeap binarytrees 18

0m4.640s

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:31:28 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>Incidentally 4 of the Intel C++ programs don't seem to have the
correct compiler options

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...cpp&lang2=icpp

I'd welcome advice on how to fix them.

Well, that's interesting. The C++ versions are allowed to use best
compiler options but java version must either use -server or -client
or -Xms64. Why don't you use the best VM options depending on the
benchmark that gives the best result?

[Chris Thomasson]

"Chris Thomasson" <cr*****@comcast.netwrote in message
news:Le******************************@comcast.com. ..

"Razii" <wh**********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:12********************************@4ax.com...

>Well, as I must find something new to do..
http://razi2.blogspot.com/2008/04/sh...arks-game.html

The site at

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

[...]

Try this one Razii

[...]

Try this please:

Source-Code
__________________________________________________ _____
C++: http://pastebin.com/m6db54f31
Java: http://pastebin.com/m15714c90


Build Flags
__________________________________________________ _____
C++: /O2 /Ob2 /Oi /Ot /Oy /GL /D "WIN32" /D "NDEBUG" /D "_CONSOLE" /D
"_UNICODE" /D "UNICODE" /FD /EHsc /MT /Fo"Release\\" /Fd"Release\vc80.pdb"
/W3 /nologo /c /Wp64 /Zi /Gr /TP /errorReport:prompt

Java: -server -Xms64m


Test Results
P4 3.06ghz 512mb
__________________________________________________ _____
C++: N = 12 / Time: 47 ms
Java: N = 12 / Time: 94 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 13 / Time: 79 ms
Java: N = 13 / Time: 140 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 14 / Time: 172 ms
Java: N = 14 / Time: 250 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 15 / Time: 344 ms
Java: N = 15 / Time: 485 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 16 / Time: 828 ms
Java: N = 16 / Time: 1156 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 17 / Time: 1954 ms
Java: N = 17 / Time: 2359 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 18 / Time: 4485 ms
Java: N = 18 / Time: 7468 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 19 / Time: 11609 ms
Java: N = 19 / Time: 15047 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 20 / Time: 58891 ms
Java: N = 20 / CRASHED! OutOfMemoryError: Java Heap space
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 21 / BOOOOOOM!
Java: N = 21 / CRASHED! OutOfMemoryError: Java Heap space
-------------------------------------------------------

Any thoughts?

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:09:24 -0700, "Chris Thomasson"
<cr*****@comcast.netwrote:

>C++: N = 20 / Time: 58891 ms
Java: N = 20 / CRASHED! OutOfMemoryError: Java Heap space

Well, then increase the heap space. The default heap space is 64m

[ldv]

On Apr 21, 12:31 am, Isaac Gouy <[e-mail]:

On Apr 20, 9:36 am, "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]:

On Apr 20, 11:12 pm, Isaac Gouy <[e-mail]:

We don't have aJETlicense.

>ExcelsiorJETnon-commercial licensing is conditional

Did you askExcelsiorfor a free license? If yes, did they refuse?

I haven't asked, I'm not interested in promotingExcelsiorJETas a
condition of using it non-commercially.

I seem to have failed to explain, sorry. I am sure you can get a free
Excelsior JET license without any such obligations. Just email them a
link to your site and ask if they want their product included in your
studies.

LDV

[Razii]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 23:44:26 -0700 (PDT), "ld*@mail.com"
<ld*@mail.comwrote:

>I seem to have failed to explain, sorry. I am sure you can get a free
Excelsior JET license without any such obligations. Just email them a
link to your site and ask if they want their product included in your
studies.

I emailed them with the same question. Their response was....

------- begin quote ---

>Can Excelsior JET 6.4 beta 2 be used with benchmak on the following

We would be happy to provide a full Excelsior JET 6.0 Pro license to
people behind that Web site if they ask us. We would also send them
future updates for as long as they are willing to include our product
in their measurements.

Including a beta version is also OK, as long as its results are
clearly marked as such. We have made a number of application
performance improvements in version 6.4, but not all of them are fully
enabled in the current beta.

Finally, I see they also have Oberon-2 listed, so they may also
include our XDS Modula-2/Oberon-2 compilers
(http://www.excelsior-usa.com/xds.html) XDS is freeware.

---- end quote-----

Obviously there is no problem with including Jet in the shootout.

[Chris Thomasson]

"Razii" <wh**********@hotmail.comwrote in message
news:ti********************************@4ax.com...

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:09:24 -0700, "Chris Thomasson"
<cr*****@comcast.netwrote:

>>C++: N = 20 / Time: 58891 ms
Java: N = 20 / CRASHED! OutOfMemoryError: Java Heap space

Well, then increase the heap space. The default heap space is 64m

Please try this new C++ version:

http://pastebin.com/m7aca890a
Here is the new times:
Java: -server -Xms512m -Xmx512m -XX:NewRatio=1
__________________________________________________ _____
C++: N = 12 / Time: 46 ms
Java: N = 12 / Time: 94 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 13 / Time: 109 ms
Java: N = 13 / Time: 149 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 14 / Time: 281 ms
Java: N = 14 / Time: 297 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 15 / Time: 531 ms
Java: N = 15 / Time: 547 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 16 / Time: 1265 ms
Java: N = 16 / Time: 1078 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 17 / Time: 2140 ms
Java: N = 17 / Time: 1875 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 18 / Time: 4650 ms
Java: N = 18 / Time: 4265 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 19 / Time: 9450 ms
Java: N = 19 / Time: 9109 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 20 / Time: 21671 ms
Java: N = 20 / Time: 23819 ms
-------------------------------------------------------
C++: N = 21 / Time: 42992 ms
Java: N = 21 / Time: 41187 ms
-------------------------------------------------------

Thanks. BTW, this will improve the shutdown time.

[cmello]

I think you missed the constructor in file1.h, and I guess you want it
public like this:

namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();

public:
Bar();
};
}

[]
Mello

On Apr 15, 10:59 am, tech <[e-mail]:

Hi, thanks now i have another problem though

In file1.h

namespace A
{
class Bar
{
void foo();

};

}

file1.cpp

namespace A
{
Bar::Bar()
{
}

}

In file2.h
namespace A {
class Bar;

}

class User
{

A::Bar* pBar;

};

In file2.cpp

#include "file2.h"
#include "file1.h"

User::func()
{

pBar = new A::Bar;
pBar->foo();

}

Now i have compiler error saying Bar has no default constructor

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 20, 1:40 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:57:30 +0200, "Bo Persson" <[e-mail]:

Must be a bad benchmark, as Java 6 -server is at 16th place!

There is another problem with theshootoutsite. The site forces the
java version to either use only -server or use only -Xms64m flag.

That's not true! Stop making stuff up!

The JVM flags are clearly shown on the webpages.

C++ version uses different flags with different benchmarks. There are
not zillion of c++ benchmarks, one with only -O2 flag and one with O3
flag for example. However, theshootoutsite does this with java. That
sounds pretty bogus. Why restrict java to use only -server or only
-Xms64? Only one java benchmark that uses different flags (depending
on what flags produce best result with a particular benchmark) should
be posted (just as C++ benchmark does).

In this benchmark, combining -Xms64m and -server produce best result

when n = 16

4.478s (when only -server flag is used)
1.286s ((when both -server flag and -Xms64 is combined).

Already 4 times faster

[Razii]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 08:25:02 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>That's not true! Stop making stuff up!

The JVM flags are clearly shown on the webpages.

It's true. The only flag I see are -server -Xbatch -classpath

why not use -server -Xms64m together? Why not use -client if that
helps in a particular benchmark? why have two and three versions, one
only for -server and other only for -client and the other only for
-Xms64m? There are many other flags that can help in cases where a lot
GC activity is included.

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 21, 9:07 am, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 08:25:02 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:

That's not true! Stop making stuff up!

The JVM flags are clearly shown on the webpages.

It's true. The only flag I see are -server -Xbatch -classpath

why not use -server -Xms64m together? Why not use -client if that
helps in a particular benchmark? why have two and three versions, one
only for -server and other only for -client and the other only for
-Xms64m? There are many other flags that can help in cases where a lot
GC activity is included.

That's not true! Stop making stuff up!

The JVM flags are clearly shown on the webpages.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...avaxx&id=2#log

[Razii]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:13:28 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>That's not true! Stop making stuff up!

The JVM flags are clearly shown on the webpages.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...avaxx&id=2#log

The site so confusing.

Why is -Xms64m flag not added here?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...lang=java&id=2

Why is -Xms64m -server not shown in the ranking on the page?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

Why is it not shown on ranking on this page?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...trees&lang=all

In any case, there should be one java result that uses the best JVM
options/flags depending on the benchmark.

Bo Persson claimed that java version is ranked 16 but with -server and
Xms64m, it's ranked number 1 in this benchmark. Obviously he too
missed this link on your site given the confused nature of the website
with tons of different flag version used for java instead of one
version with best flags (including -client) depending on the
situation.

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 21, 5:24 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:13:28 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:

That's not true! Stop making stuff up!

The JVM flags are clearly shown on the webpages.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...php?test=binar....

The site so confusing.

Why have you not apologized for repeatedly posting false information,
even after you had been told it was false?

Why is -Xms64m flag not added here?
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=binarytrees&...

Why is -Xms64m -server not shown in the ranking on the page?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

Why is it not shown on ranking on this page?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=binarytrees&...

In any case, there should be one java result that uses the best JVM
options/flags depending on the benchmark.

Bo Persson claimed that java version is ranked 16 but with -server and
Xms64m, it's ranked number 1 in this benchmark. Obviously he too
missed this link on your site given the confused nature of the website
with tons of different flag version used for java instead of one
version with best flags (including -client) depending on the
situation.

Bo Persson followed the Java URL you posted on Apr 19, 8:24pm & 8:27pm

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....b91dfa158e6ac6

You didn't post the Java -Xms64m URL even though you posted the Intel C
++ URL for the website that shows Java -Xms64m

Why didn't you post the Java -Xms64m URL?
Why are you still not posting URLs that show these Java measurements?

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

[Razii]

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:52:39 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>Why have you not apologized for repeatedly posting false information,
even after you had been told it was false?

No, it was not false. There is no -Xms64m and -server linked from the
main page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

Anyone can go there and check it. You dug up a link but it's not on
the main page. Also,-Xms64m "version" always uses -server flag. Why?
Why it must always use -server flag if the client flag does better in
some cases?

>Bo Persson followed the Java URL you posted on Apr 19, 8:24pm & 8:27pm

Or perhaps Bo Person went to the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

and found the list doesn't have -Xms64m and -server. Anyone can go
there and check it.

[Bo Persson]

Razii wrote:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:52:39 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>Why have you not apologized for repeatedly posting false
information, even after you had been told it was false?

No, it was not false. There is no -Xms64m and -server linked from
the main page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

Anyone can go there and check it. You dug up a link but it's not on
the main page. Also,-Xms64m "version" always uses -server flag. Why?
Why it must always use -server flag if the client flag does better
in some cases?

>Bo Persson followed the Java URL you posted on Apr 19, 8:24pm &
8:27pm

Or perhaps Bo Person went to the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

and found the list doesn't have -Xms64m and -server. Anyone can go
there and check it.

I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree in benchmark
selector at the top of the page. That brought me here:

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...trees&lang=all

Found it very "interesting" with a benchmark where ML, Haskell,
Erlang, and Lisp is at the top, shortly followed by Eiffel and Basic.
Must have taken a lot of effort to invent that test! :-)
If you look in the "penalty box" at the bottom of the page, you will
of course find that g++ has the best result, but was disqualified for
chosing a faster memory allocation scheme. ROTFL!
Bo Persson

[Razii]

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:56:43 +0200, "Bo Persson" <bo*@gmb.dkwrote:

>I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree in benchmark
selector at the top of the page. That brought me here:

Now he should stop blaming me for posting wrong link and apologize.
The main page doesn't have -Xms64m -server (#1 ranked in this
benchmark). In fact, the main page ranking only uses -server flag (and
not whatever flag that would be fastest in a particular benchmark). I
was correct after all.

The guy is weird, by the way. He also has strange excuses for not
including Jet (even though many other commercial compilers are
included and links to the their commercial site posted).

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 22, 11:49 am, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:52:39 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:

Why have you not apologized for repeatedly posting false information,
even after you had been told it was false?

No, it was not false. There is no -Xms64m and -server linked from the
main page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

Anyone can go there and check it. You dug up a link but it's not on
the main page. Also,-Xms64m "version" always uses -server flag. Why?
Why it must always use -server flag if the client flag does better in
some cases?

Bo Persson followed the Java URL you posted on Apr 19, 8:24pm & 8:27pm

Or perhaps Bo Person went to the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

and found the list doesn't have -Xms64m and -server. Anyone can go
there and check it.

Why are you posting false information that a page titled "Create your
own Ranking" is the main page?

The main page is titled "The Computer Language Benchmarks Game".

Why are you posting false information that "There is no -Xms64m and -
server linked from the main page"? "Anyone can go there and check it"
and find the link "Java 6 -Xms64m initial java server heap size 64m"

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 22, 1:56 pm, "Bo Persson" <[e-mail]:

Razii wrote:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 09:52:39 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<[e-mail]:

Why have you not apologized for repeatedly posting false
information, even after you had been told it was false?

No, it was not false. There is no -Xms64m and -server linked from
the main page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

Anyone can go there and check it. You dug up a link but it's not on
the main page. Also,-Xms64m "version" always uses -server flag. Why?
Why it must always use -server flag if the client flag does better
in some cases?

Bo Persson followed the Java URL you posted on Apr 19, 8:24pm &
8:27pm

Or perhaps Bo Person went to the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

and found the list doesn't have -Xms64m and -server. Anyone can go
there and check it.

I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree in benchmark
selector at the top of the page.

There is no benchmark selector on the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

That brought me here:

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=binarytrees&...

Found it very "interesting" with a benchmark where ML, Haskell,
Erlang, and Lisp is at the top, shortly followed by Eiffel and Basic.
Must have taken a lot of effort to invent that test! :-)

If you look in the "penalty box" at the bottom of the page, you will
of course find that g++ has the best result, but was disqualified for
chosing a faster memory allocation scheme. ROTFL!

Bo Persson

It's always faster to run just the lap in the stadium rather than the
whole marathon.

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 22, 2:15 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:56:43 +0200, "Bo Persson" <[e-mail]:

I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree in benchmark
selector at the top of the page. That brought me here:

Now he should stop blaming me for posting wrong link and apologize.
The main page doesn't have -Xms64m -server (#1 ranked in this
benchmark). In fact, the main page ranking only uses -server flag (and
not whatever flag that would be fastest in a particular benchmark). I
was correct after all.

The main page is titled "The Computer Language Benchmarks Game".

Why are you posting false information that "There is no -Xms64m and -
server linked from the main page"? "Anyone can go there and check it"
and find the link "Java 6 -Xms64m initial java server heap size 64m"

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

Stop posting false information!

>
The guy is weird, by the way. He also has strange excuses for not
including Jet (even though many other commercial compilers are
included and links to the their commercial site posted).

Some compilers are included which have freely available non-commercial
licenses (the Jet non-commercial license is not freely available -
it's restricted).

[Razii]

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:49:07 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>There is no benchmark selector on the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

There is. If you click on "Show" tab, it takes you to this page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

There is no -server -Xms64m on this ranking. That's how Bo apparently
found the link. You should apologize by claiming Bo followed my link.
He didn't. Also, you didn't explain why -Xms64m must always use
-server? Why not -client sometimes if that helps in some cases? Or
other flags?

>Some compilers are included which have freely available non-commercial
licenses (the Jet non-commercial license is not freely available -
it's restricted).

There is no restriction on testing and posting the benchmark. You are
lying. The restriction is on distributing compiled executable, which
is irrelevant here.

[Razii]

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:49:07 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>There is no benchmark selector on the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

There is. If you click on "Show" tab, it takes you to this page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

There is no -server -Xms64m on this ranking. That's how Bo apparently
found the link. You should apologize by claiming Bo followed my link.
He didn't. Also, you didn't explain why -Xms64m must always use
-server? Why not -client sometimes if that helps in some cases? Or
other flags?

[Razii]

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:41:44 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy
<ig****@yahoo.comwrote:

>Why are you posting false information that a page titled "Create your
own Ranking" is the main page?

It's clear by now that you and your site has zero credibility. It's a
scam. I won't waste any more time on you after this post.

To summarize, anyone can go to the main site

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

where there is no ranking, no numbers, nothing. If you click on "show"
tab, that takes you to this page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all

that does have ranking, but there is no -Xms64m. Also, why -Xms64m
must always use -server flag and vice versa? This guy failed to answer
that. Even Bo Person told him that this is how he found the 16th place
ranking, but this idiot, instead of admitting the obvious, keeps
spining and twisting.

I am done with this fool and will continue posting the rest of the
results.

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 23, 1:38 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:49:07 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:

There is no benchmark selector on the main page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

There is. If you click on "Show" tab, it takes you to this page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

There is no -server -Xms64m on this ranking. That's how Bo apparently
found the link. You should apologize by claiming Bo followed my link.
He didn't. Also, you didn't explain why -Xms64m must always use
-server? Why not -client sometimes if that helps in some cases? Or
other flags?

Bo wrote: "I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree in
benchmark selector at the top of the page. That brought me here...".

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....2a2ac332ddd04b

As you just discovered - Bo could not have chosen "binary-tree in
benchmark selector at the top of the page".

There is no "binary-tree in benchmark selector at the top of the
page".

There's a button hard-coded to an entirely different webpage!

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 24, 2:28 am, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:41:44 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:

Why are you posting false information that a page titled "Create your
own Ranking" is the main page?

It's clear by now that you and your site has zero credibility. It's a
scam. I won't waste any more time on you after this post.

To summarize, anyone can go to the main site

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

where there is no ranking, no numbers, nothing. If you click on "show"
tab, that takes you to this page

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...est=all〈=all

that does have ranking, but there is no -Xms64m. Also, why -Xms64m
must always use -server flag and vice versa? This guy failed to answer
that. Even Bo Person told him that this is how he found the 16th place
ranking, but this idiot, instead of admitting the obvious, keeps
spining and twisting.

I am done with this fool and will continue posting the rest of the
results

To summarize, anyone can go to the main site

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

where there's a "Programming language measurements A to Z" link list
which includes

Java 6 -Xms64m initial java server heap size 64m

[Bo Persson]

Isaac Gouy wrote:

On Apr 23, 1:38 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

>On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:49:07 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:

>>There is no benchmark selector on the main page

>>http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

There is. If you click on "Show" tab, it takes you to this page.

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...?test=all?=all

There is no -server -Xms64m on this ranking. That's how Bo
apparently found the link. You should apologize by claiming Bo
followed my link. He didn't. Also, you didn't explain why -Xms64m
must always use -server? Why not -client sometimes if that helps
in some cases? Or other flags?

Bo wrote: "I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree
in benchmark selector at the top of the page. That brought me
here...".

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....2a2ac332ddd04b

As you just discovered - Bo could not have chosen "binary-tree in
benchmark selector at the top of the page".

There is no "binary-tree in benchmark selector at the top of the
page".

There's a button hard-coded to an entirely different webpage!

Ok, so I started from there (following Razii's link).

I *could* have gone to the main page, pressed "show", and *then*
selected binary-tree. Big deal!
I now see that Java 6 -server is down to 17th place. :-)
Bo Persson

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 25, 12:57 pm, "Bo Persson" <[e-mail]:

Isaac Gouy wrote:

On Apr 23, 1:38 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 07:49:07 -0700 (PDT), Isaac Gouy

<[e-mail]:
There is no benchmark selector on the main page

>>http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

There is. If you click on "Show" tab, it takes you to this page.

>http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...?test=all?=all

There is no -server -Xms64m on this ranking. That's how Bo
apparently found the link. You should apologize by claiming Bo
followed my link. He didn't. Also, you didn't explain why -Xms64m
must always use -server? Why not -client sometimes if that helps
in some cases? Or other flags?

Bo wrote: "I actually went to the main page, and chose binary-tree
in benchmark selector at the top of the page. That brought me
here...".

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....2a2ac332ddd04b

As you just discovered - Bo could not have chosen "binary-tree in
benchmark selector at the top of the page".

There is no "binary-tree in benchmark selector at the top of the
page".

There's a button hard-coded to an entirely different webpage!

Ok, so I started from there (following Razii's link).

I *could* have gone to the main page, pressed "show", and *then*
selected binary-tree. Big deal!

I now see that Java 6 -server is down to 17th place. :-)

Bo Persson

We don't use labels like 1st place, 2nd place, 3rd place on the
webpages because those labels don't say anything that's interesting.

We use labels that say how much slower the implementation is than the
fastest implementation.

Overall, the geometric mean of those ratios for the Java 6 -server
programs is 1.7 times larger than the geometric mean of those ratios
for the measured Intel C++ programs.

[Razii]

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:57:45 +0200, "Bo Persson" <bo*@gmb.dkwrote:

>I *could* have gone to the main page, pressed "show"...

Exactly. And -Xms64m is not on that page.

>I now see that Java 6 -server is down to 17th place. :-)

The shootout site is bogus and should not be taken seriously. It
forces java version to use only one flag in all tests, regardless if
another flag would do better. The guy also posted bogus excuses why
Jet is not on the site.

Also, as someone pointed out, the newly added Lisaac numbers in
binarytrees are bogus too.
(left = NULL).if {
left := TREENODE.clone;
right := TREENODE.clone;
};

The above tests whether the node has a NULL left branch and only then
creates two new fresh nodes for the left and right branches. Lisaac
version does only a very small fraction of the allocations done by a
correct implementation of the benchmark.

[Roedy Green]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 22:27:02 -0500, Razii <wh**********@hotmail.com>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

fastest java compiler,

By that do you mean?

1. fastest to compile a single class

2. fastest to compile some large group of classes.

3. generates the fastest byte code.

4. generates the fastest machine code
--

Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
The Java Glossary
http://mindprod.com

[Razii]

On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 21:49:47 GMT, Roedy Green
<se*********@mindprod.com.invalidwrote:

>fastest java compiler,

By that do you mean?

It's claimed it generates the fastest machine code (compared to
HotSpot and GCJ), something that has not yet proven. I will finish the
rest of benchmarks from the bogus shootout site later.

[Isaac Gouy]

On Apr 28, 1:33 pm, Razii <[e-mail]:

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:57:45 +0200, "Bo Persson" <[e-mail]:

I *could* have gone to the main page, pressed "show"...

Exactly. And -Xms64m is not on that page.

And -Xms64m is not shown
- on the FAQ page
- on any of the Debian : AMD™ Sempron™ pages
- on numerous other pages
And -Xms64m is shown on the main page

"Java 6 -Xint ubiquitous bytecode interpreter virtual machine
Java 6 -Xint Debian
Java 6 -Xms64m initial java server heap size 64m
Java GNU gcj optimizing ahead-of-time compiler
Java GNU gcj Debian
JavaScript JavaScriptCore WebKit-based ECMA scripting implementation
Debian"

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

And -Xms64m is shown on this "Create your own Ranking" page

"1.6 Fortran Intel
1.7 Eiffel SmartEiffel
1.7 Java 6 -Xms64m
1.8 Java 6 -server
1.8 OCaml 2.33"

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/gp...t=all&lang=all
And -Xms64m is shown on numerous other pages.

I now see that Java 6 -server is down to 17th place. :-)

The shootout site is bogus and should not be taken seriously. It
forces java version to use only one flag in all tests, regardless if
another flag would do better. The guy also posted bogus excuses why
Jet is not on the site.

Also, as someone pointed out, the newly added Lisaac numbers in
binarytrees are bogus too.

(left = NULL).if {
left := TREENODE.clone;
right := TREENODE.clone;
};

The above tests whether the node has a NULL left branch and only then
creates two new fresh nodes for the left and right branches. Lisaac
version does only a very small fraction of the allocations done by a
correct implementation of the benchmark.