> Don't make "unfair" accusations -- say why you think that

Because there seems to be a bias in selecting the problems solved in the benchmark games: to be "fair" they should be randomly selected from a pool of all possible problems solved with computer programs. Or, maybe, the frequency of these problems in the real world should be taken into account?

Of course, they're not actually unfair since they hide nothing. The error is in the interpretation, e.g. "My program will be faster if I write it in language X instead of Y."

The nice link you posted sums it up well: "Programming languages are compared against each other as though their designers intended them to be used for the exact same purpose - that just isn't so."

edit: Spelling..

1) "they're not actually unfair"

So don't say that they are!

2) "The nice link you posted sums it up well"

I agree - but then I wrote those words.

3) "there seems to be a bias in selecting the problems solved in the benchmark games"

You still haven't said anything that suggests they are "targeted at low-level languages".

1) I didn't .. 3) I did in GP

1) You implied "unfair" by opining on what they would have to do to be "fair"; and you said something less vague than "unfair", you said "unfairly" targeted at low-level languages. If you don't mean to say they are "unfair" then your words are going to confuse ;-)

3) GP? Your opining about "selecting the problems" doesn't support the claim "targeted at low-level languages" anymore than it supports the claim targeted at high-level languages :-)

As you noted the important thing to remember is that timing measurements are not promises, and they aren't general answers to the question - Will my program be faster if I write it in language X?