Yeah reading the link above, I would summarize it as this: If someone is
good at/and likes C/C++, you will never be able to convince them that an
interpretted language is as good.  Most proponents of interpretted languages
just figure the processor speed and memory improvements will allow them to
carry on without using compilers.  When I profile my R code, the vast
majority of the time is usually in read.table and write.table, so I figure
there is not much I can do to improve my code.  While using Perl & C & R
together could bring some speed imporovement, there is also a downside to
learning and maintaining code in different langues and putting all the
pieces together.

But then again, I work with monthly data, so its not really a concern of
mine.  Most hedge funds that work with tick data use Perl to process the
data and then maybe R to analyze it.  Basically, the volume is too great to
do in R. Of course linking to a database to a nice plus in R, I don't know
if Perl can do that.


On 7/18/06, BBands <bbands@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/2/06, Manoj <manojsw@gmail.com> wrote:
> >      My hunch is that processing time shouldn't be *very* different
> > between R & other languages but then it's just a hunch. Can anybody
> > share/comment on there experience? Sorry for the open-ended nature of
> > the question.
>
> There is a interesting thread on slashdot this AM that addresses this
> question:
>
> http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/07/18/0146216.shtml
>
>    jab
> --
> John Bollinger, CFA, CMT
> www.BollingerBands.com
>
> If you advance far enough, you arrive at the beginning.
>
> _______________________________________________
> R-SIG-Finance@stat.math.ethz.ch mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-finance
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

