Jos,

Here VFP is probably going to fare a lot worse than any native compiled language because you're dealing with low level processor directives. Any compiled language like C,C++,Pascal etc is going to be much faster at this. .NET languages which eventually compile down to machine code as well should be much faster although not as drastically because of the intermediary JIT compilation. I'd expect Java to give results similar to .NET's as well.

Pure scripting languages like PHP and even Ruby probably will be on par or slower than VFP.

Realistically though code like this doesn't matter much because how often do you write code like this? Code that matters is typical CRUD data access and working against some sort of higher level output API (expecially for Web apps) which are most likely implemented in machine code by the fraemwork. Language performance is less and less important - it's the platform that matters. This is especially true for Web frameworks where the core code operations in the framework tend to be native code that is called by scripting languages.

VFP is plenty of fast for just about any kind of app IMHO. Where it lacks is in scalability as it's designed to run as if it was the only thing on the system (even when running as MTDLLs).

+++ Rick ---


>Hi All,
>
>I am doing a raw speed test on some very simple operations to compare basic VFP operations with another language. Would some of you care to do a similar test against another language of your choice? e.g. Python, PHP, VB.Net, whatever. I am looking for VFP speed vs. language_of_your_choice speed on the same machine. Here are two simple tests manipulating some numbers and building a string in VFP
>
>
>

>CLEAR
>tStartTime = SECONDS()
>ta=0
>FOR i = 1 TO 1000000
>  ta = Log(i) + Cos(i) + Sin(i) + Log(i) + exp(i)
>next  
>? SECONDS() - tStartTime 
>
>*
>
>tStartTime = SECONDS()
>ta = ""
>FOR i = 1 TO 1000000
>  ta = ta + "xx"
>next  
>? SECONDS() - tStartTime 
>