# How to justify using available code (in different language) for comparing algorithms [closed]

I have proposed an algorithm for a scheduling problem in a submitting paper. In the revision, the reviewer asked us to compare with another algorithm in the literature. Our algorithm is in MATLAB, and the comparing one is in C++, and the code is publicly available. We did not re-implement the C++ code, to avoid any decrease in the efficiency of their algorithm, and to save time as well. Now the reviewer is responding: It is probable that there is a significantcant difference in performance between MATLAB and C++. The authors should make it clear if and how the results were normalized to ensure a fair comparison.''

So my question is this: Is there any (scientific) ratio or similar comparison between the efficiency of MATLAB and C++?

When we opted to use the available code, we thought it is completely OK since MATLAB is known to be slower. So using the comparing algorithm in a faster environment is OK. I should add that our algorithm is now performing much better than the comparing one.

• This is a relatively common complaint: indeed performance results can be easily affected by the choice of language/environment. Still, since you are using the slower platform, that should be OK. You might want to try defending your claims by providing evidence that MATLAB is indeed slower. It's hard to find a proper comparison: I know about only informal ones, which carry some caveats for researchers. – chi May 13 '19 at 15:54
• Perhaps this is more appropriate for Computational Science. – Yuval Filmus May 13 '19 at 16:54
• I'm voting to close this question because it was cross-posted on SciComp.SE. – D.W. May 18 '19 at 21:18