Linked by Hadrien Grasland on Wed 15th Jun 2011 07:32 UTC, submitted by ebasconp
Permalink for comment 477709
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/13/13 14:35 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/11/13 17:07 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/10/13 23:13 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/08/13 14:57 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/07/13 11:40 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/04/13 12:45 UTC
Linked by nfeske on 05/31/13 10:12 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/29/13 16:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-01-07
But assembly IS still faster than C. Only that C is overall much more efficient to code in than assembly and that computers are fast enough to ignore the difference. Likewise, OO was also considered slow but the computers grew fast enough. However, falling back would still show a significant to dramatic speed boost, only that it's not noteworthy.
Likewise, I prefer to code in Ruby with its heavy reflection than Go anyday (mind you, i still prefer C++ over Go). However, I don't see why C++ should add reflection. Instead, adding these features would instead slow it down IMO and make it a less likeable alternative than more flexible languages. Besides, Objective-C kinda does the same job..