Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOME PROGRAMMING

LANGUAGES

Oguntunde, Bosede Oyenike

Department of Mathematical Sciences, Redeemer’s University, Mowe Ogun State, Nigeria

Abstract
Programming languages are used for controlling the behavior of computer machines. Several
programming languages exist and new are being created always. These programming languages
become popular with use to different programmers because there is always a tradeoff between
ease of learning and use, efficiency and power of expression. In this work we examine six
programming languages two from different groups of scientific, non scientific and object
oriented programming languages. We present an algorithm for performing combination and
permutation to implement the comparison. Two parameters, the memory consumption and
running time requirement are tested and objected oriented programming languages perform
better in term of their running times although same could not be said of them in term of memory
requirements.

Key Words: Combination, permutation, running time, memory requirement

1. Introduction

A programming language is an artificial language designed to express computations that

can be performed by a machine, particularly a computer. Programming languages can be used to
create programs that control the behavior of a machine, to express algorithms precisely, or as a
mode of human communication.
Most programming languages describe computation in an imperative style, i.e., as a
sequence of commands, although some languages, such as those that support functional
programming or logic programming, use alternative forms of description.
Traits often considered important for what constitute a programming language include:
 Function and target: A computer programming language is a language used to write
computer programs, which involve a computer performing some kind of computation or

107
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

algorithm and possibly control external devices such as printers, disk drives, robots, and
so on.
 Abstractions: Programming languages usually contain abstractions for defining and
manipulating data structures or controlling the flow of execution. The practical necessity
that a programming language support adequate abstractions is expressed by the
abstraction principle; this principle is sometimes formulated as recommendation to the
programmer to make proper use of such abstractions.
 Expressive power: The theory of computation classifies languages by the computations
they are capable of expressing. All Turing complete languages can implement the same
set of algorithms.

1.1 Syntax and semantic

All programming languages have some primitive building blocks for the description of
data and the processes or transformations applied to them. These primitives are defined by
syntactic and semantic rules which describe their structure and meaning respectively.
The syntax of a language describes the possible combinations of symbols that form a
syntactically correct program. The meaning given to a combination of symbols is handled by
semantics (either formal or hard-coded in a reference implementation). Since most languages are
textual, this article discusses textual syntax.
The static semantics defines restrictions on the structure of valid texts that are hard or impossible
to express in standard syntactic formalisms. For compiled languages, static semantics essentially
include those semantic rules that can be checked at compile time. Examples include checking
that every identifier is declared before it is used (in languages that require such declarations) or
that the labels on the arms of a case statement are distinct.
1.2 Language processors
Generally, computers do not understand high-level languages. To make computer
understand the program written in high-level language a translator will be required to translate
the program into its machine language equivalent. Such translators are called Language
processors. Language processors are of three classes namely: Assembler, Interpreter and
compiler.

108
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

Assembler: it translate source program written in assembly code to machine code object
programs.
Interpreter: it translates a high-level language one statement at a time and carries out the
execution of the statement before proceeding to the next statement.
Compiler: it translates a program written in high-level language into its machine language
equivalent.
The function of a language processor is to check for the syntactic and semantic
correctness of statements in a program. This is done before the actual translation into machine
language.
The subsequent chapters shall discuss in full the three programming languages:
Scientific, non-scientific and object-oriented programming languages using one language as an
illustration for each.
1.3 Our Objectives
Typically, we are interested in analyzing the “efficiency” of a given programming language. This
involve determining the quantity of computer resources consumed by the language; measurable
resources include the amount of memory (memory space) required by a language and the amount
of computational time (running time) required by a programming language. We evaluate the
performance of some programming languages using performance parameters such as running
time and memory allocation.

2. Programming languages
Programming languages are grouped into three major categories: scientific, non-
scientific and object oriented programming languages.
2.1.1 Scientific programming language

Scientific programming languages are procedural languages. They are command driven or
statement oriented languages. Their basis concept is the machine state. For scientific
programming language, FORTRAN and PASCAL would be used illustration.

2.2 Non-scientific programming language

Non-scientific programming languages are also procedural languages. They are closer and
similar to most of human language. Basic and COBOL will be examined in this class.

109
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

2.3 Object oriented programming language

Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) is a method of designing and implementing software. OOP
languages incorporate not just language syntax and compiler, but an entire development
environment. These include a significant library of well-designed, easy to use objects.
It is a new way of thinking about problem solving with computers. An OOP language should
contain the following seven qualities [2,3].
 The support of modules
 Module must support data abstraction
 Automatic memory management
 All data are defined by abstract data type based modules
 Ability to extend existing classes
 Support of polymorphism and dynamic binding
 Multiple inheritances.
We examine c++ and java programming languages in this class.
Several works have been done in the area of comparisons of programming languages.
Jason Voegele presented a personal evaluation of some common programming
languagesComparison between highly object based Java and non-object oriented by
Benchmarking [1]. Comparison of programming languages by Alain [16]. Jason Voegele [14]
presented a analytical comparison of nine different languages titled “Evaluation and comparison
of programming languages”. The work was intended to provide very high-level information
about the respective languages which are Eiffel, Smalltalk, Ruby, Java, C#, C++, Python, Perl
and Visual Basic. Table 1 below shows the evaluation and comparison of some programming
languages by Jason Voegele. This work however attempt to compare 6 different programming
languages in three categories of scientific, non-scientific and object oriented programming
languages.
Section one presents an introduction into the work, section two gives an overview of
programming languages while permutation and combination algorithms are presented in section
three. The implementation and data analysis are presented in section four and section five
concludes the work.

110
 Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

Table 1. Evaluation and Comparison of Programming Languages

Smallt Visual
Eiffel Ruby Java C# C++ Python Perl
alk Basic
Hybri
Object- d/ Partial
Orientatio Pure Pure Pure Hybrid Hybrid
Add-OnMulti-
/ Hybrid
Hybrid Suppo
n Paradi rt
gm
Static /
Dynam Dynami Dyna
Dynamic Static Dynamic Static Static Static Static
ic c mic
Typing
Generic
Yes N/A N/A No No Yes N/A N/A No
Classes
Single
Single
Single class,
class,
Inheritanc class, multipl Multip Multipl Multip
Multiple Single multiple None
e multiple e le e le
interface
"mixins" interfac
s
e
Feature
Yes No Yes No No No No No No
Renaming
Method
Overloadin No No No Yes Yes Yes No No No
g
Operator
Overloadin Yes Yes? Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No
g
Agents
Higher Lambda
(with Yes
Order Blocks Blocks No No No Express No
version (???)
Functions ions
5)
Yes Yes Yes
Lexical Yes
(inline (blocks No No No (since Yes No
Closures (blocks)
agents) ) 2.1)
Mark Mark Mark
Mark and and and and Referen Refere Refere
Garbage Sweep or Sweep Mark and Sweep Sweep ce nce nce
None
Collection Generatio or Sweep or or Countin Counti Counti
nal Generat Generati Genera g ng ng
ional onal tional
Uniform
Yes N/A Yes No No No No No Yes
Access

111
 Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

Smallt Visual
Eiffel Ruby Java C# C++ Python Perl
alk Basic
Class
Variables / No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No
Methods
Yes (as
of
Reflection Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes? No
version
5)
public,
public
protect
Protect public, ,
ed,
ed protecte protec
public, private, Name
Access Selective Data, d, ted, public,
protected, internal Mangli None
Control Export Public "packag privat private
private , ng
Method e", e,
protect
s private "frien
ed
ds"
internal
Design by
Yes No Add-on No No No No No No
Contract

Implem
Impleme
entatio
Multithrea ntation- Librar
n- Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
ding Depende ies
Depend
nt
ent

Regular Standar Standar

Standard Built-
Expression No No Built-in d No d No
Library in
s Library Library

Pointer
No No No No Yes Yes No No No
Arithmetic

112
 Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

Smallt Visual
Eiffel Ruby Java C# C++ Python Perl
alk Basic

All
C, C (via
Language C, C++, C, C++, C, some .NET C, C++, C,
C Assem DCO
Integration Java Java C++ Langua Java C++
bler M)
ges

Yes
Built-In
No No? Yes Yes Yes No No? (perlse No
Security
c)

Capers
Jones
15 15 N/A 6 N/A 6 N/A 15 11
Language
Level*

(Adapted from Jason Voegele, programming language comparison [14])

Based on number of source code lines per function point.

113
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

3 Permutation and combination algorithm

An algorithm can be defined as a step by step method of solving problems. The
algorithm for the permutation and combination program is given bellow:

Start

Supply
N

Supply
R

No
Perform
Comb = N!/R!(N-R)!
Permuta
tion?

Yes

Perm = N!/(N-R)!

Write comb
Write perm

Stop

Fig.1 Flowchart

Algorithm
1. Supply the bigger positive integer as N
2. Supply the smaller positive integer as R
3. IF Permutation Then
Permutation = N! /(N-R)!
Else combination = N!/R!(N-R)!
5. Print permutation / combination
6. Exit.

114
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

4. System implementation / analysis of data

Different positive integer values were used in running and executing of the program.
Each running time and memory requirement were recorded.
20
Illustration P8 where N = 20 and R = 8
Using the permutation formula N! / (N-R)!
20! / (20 - 8)! = 20! /12!
= 5079110400
Combination 20C8
Using the combination formula N!/R!(N-R)! with N= 20 and R= 8
= 20! /8! (20-8)! = 20! /8! * 12!
= 125970
Analysis
From our experiment, a set of values were obtained which give the running time and
memory utilization of different programming languages for performing combination and
permutation for different positive integers. We present these programming languages against
their requirements in term of memory utilization and running times. The memory requirement
for the source code measured in bytes is plotted against each of the selected programming
languages and the running time requirements measured in seconds is also plotted against the
programming languages.

Memory Requirement

3000
2500
Memory (b)

2000
1500 Series1
1000
500
0
N

VA
L
SIC
+

AL

BO
RA
C+

JA
SC
BA
RT

CO
PA
FO

Language

115
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

Fig.2 Memory requirements

Running Time

12
10
Time (s)

8
6 Series1
4
2
0
AN

VA
L
C
+

AL

BO
C+

SI
R

JA
SC

BA
RT

CO
PA
FO

Language

Fig.3 Running Time Requirements

4.1 Discussion
From the result above, it could be observed that Object-Oriented program has the
smallest running time followed by scientific program then Non-scientific.
With the Object Oriented programming languages, JAVA program is faster than C++,
although it required more memory allocation than all other programming languages.
With the Scientific programming language, PASCAL is faster than FORTRAN but
they both have the same memory space requirements. Lastly, in Non-scientific programming
language, BASIC has lesser running time compare to COBOL and it also required less
memory space allocation compared to COBOL.
5. Conclusion
This work presents a comparison of some programming languages; we present a
combination and permutation calculator written in all the languages to measure their
performance. To conclude the write-up it is note-worthy that there are many other
programming languages that are all improvement from the old ones. As different
programming languages are being produced, two qualities (runtime and memory space) are
being considered most. In reality, the fastest are not always the smallest, so tradeoffs between
these two important qualities are being maintained.

116
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

Thus, Object Oriented Programming Language was designed to be a good tool for
building a wide variety of systems and allow a wide variety of ideas to be expressed directly.
Not everything can be expressed directly using the built-in features of a language. In fact, that
isn’t even the idea. Language features exist to support a variety of programming style and
techniques. Consequently, the task of learning a language should focus on mastering the
native and natural styles for that language, not on the understanding of every little detail of all
the language features.
Though our research is based on comparison between scientific, non-scientific and
object oriented program using a program that compute the permutation and combination of n
integer. Many researches can still be done on this topic using other program to illustrate.
Likewise, there can be comparison of programming languages through the features of the
languages.

117
Transnational Journal of Science and Technology June 2012 edition vol. 2, No.5

References:

Benchmarking, Comparison between high object based java & non object oriented,
(doi.wiley.com//0.1002/cpe.658)
Bertrand Mayer (1993). What is an Object-Oriented Environment? Five Principles
and their Application, in Journal of Object-Oriented Programming, Volume 6, Number
4, July-August 1993, pages 75-81.
Bertrand Mayer (1994). An Object-Oriented Environment: Principles and
Application, Prentice Hall, 1994.
John R. Hubbard, 1996, Schaum’s outline of Theory and Problems of programming with
C++, published by Mc Grew-Hill book Singapore.
Martine Robert Cecil, 2003, UMI for java programmers, Printice Hall.
Pius Ezeamii, 2005, Computer science for beginners, published by Infomedia, Lagos.
Rajaramon, H. V. Sahasrabuddhe, 1991, Computer programming in COBOL.
Seymour Lipschutz, 1996, Schaum’s oytline of Theory and Problems of Programming with
FORTRAN, Mc Grew-Hill, Singapore.

Yekinni A. Salimanu, Saheed O. Adelana, Wasiu A. Akanji, 2001, Introduction to comp.

system & BASIC Programming, published by Oyaz-Gilgal company, Lagos.
http://www.threadvisors.com/lang cmparison.htm
http://userweb.cs.utexas.edu/users/djimenez/utsa/cs3343/lecture25.html
http://www.mathsisfun.com/combinatorics/combinations-permutations.html
http://www.tutors4you.com/circularpermutations.htm
http://www.jvoegele.com/software/langcomp.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_programming_languages
(http://b5cw.ercim.org/pub/b5ce.cgi/d283652/31-D’hondt-FP_2005_2006_SR_INRIA.pdf-.)

118