Following up on the recent posts on GT.M bindings for other languages:
It is natural to ask about the computational performance of these bindings.
To attempt to answer this question, we prepared the following three basic tests:
They are implementations of a basic computation of first 100 terms
of the Fibonacci series, repeated 1000 times.
The measurements of running these tests in a DELL PRECISION M6700 were:
- M = 0.37 seconds
- C++ = 1.10 seconds
- Python = 1.75 seconds
This is consistent with what one can expect, knowing that the C++ implementation is
going through the C API of GT.M, and that the Python implementation is produced by
wrapping the C++ implementation using SWIG.
Please share your comments and ideas on how to improve and better take advantage
of these bindings.