Fibonacci(50) Performance: Java C C++ D Go Terra (Lua) Lua-JIT (Lua) (joshitech.blogspot.com)

4 points by rjoshi 11y ago ↗ HN

10 comments

[ 359 ms ] story [ 1579 ms ] thread

senthadev 11y ago ↗

You should try to implement the Fib with tail call and then test it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tail_call

dozzie 11y ago ↗

First he should implement it properly, remembering last two values at any time. His way is just plain outrageous.

rjoshi 11y ago ↗

Here the comparison is not about the algorithm, but language with similar recursion logic.

dozzie 11y ago ↗

Then he should have used appropriate function to calculate, Ackermann for instance.

bjorg 11y ago ↗

I wonder if the author validated the results returned by Java for Fibonacci 50. Performance can increase significantly when correctness is not an issue. :)

rjoshi 11y ago ↗

Yes, if you look at the https://github.com/rohitjoshi/lang-compare/blob/master/fibon..., it print fibonacci (50) = 12586269025

tasoeur 11y ago ↗

Does anyone know why Java would be faster here? Is there any kind of optimization happening under the hood? (Automatic memoization?)

[deleted] 11y ago ↗

(comment deleted)

rjoshi 11y ago ↗

See the updated blog again. It seems issue is with Clang/LLVM on MacOSX. I reran the test on Linux with Gnu g++ and it outperforms Java.

igouy 11y ago ↗

Back in the day, when we didn't know any better...

https://web.archive.org/web/20080729072224/http://shootout.a...