From owner-freebsd-chat Tue May 9 19: 4:45 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from corserv.corserv.com (corserv.corserv.com [206.180.159.81]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D642F37B604 for ; Tue, 9 May 2000 19:04:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from klyons@corserv.corserv.com) Received: (from klyons@localhost) by corserv.corserv.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id VAA13005; Tue, 9 May 2000 21:09:52 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from klyons) Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 21:09:52 -0500 (CDT) From: Kevin Lyons Message-Id: <200005100209.VAA13005@corserv.corserv.com> To: brett@lariat.org, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org Subject: Re: assembly vs C Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > At 02:26 PM 5/9/2000, J McKitrick wrote: > > And when you're doing intense pattern matching in ANY environment -- including > BSD -- the results are amazing. I've given people 500x (that's 500x, not 500%) > speedups over their old, creaky Perl scripts. (The client in one case thought > that his Web app was unscalable; it was still slow after he distributed > it among a whole rack of servers. Now, he has all of these extra CPUs that > are just loafing along....) > Well almost anything is faster than PERL. Why PERL continues to be used on production webservers when you have C tools like CGIC is beyond understanding. Its almost as bad as using VB under asp! I suspect the pattern matching routine could have approached 500x if written in tight C. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message