Re:Create your own Game Engine but don't use it
by pjmlp on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @06:18PM
(#14757170)
> So what? Those words probably had a good argument behind them, at the time.
> In the MS-DOS days, compilers weren't as good as today, so handwritten ASM paid off.
Just like C compilers had enough money spent into their optimizers, that eventually made them competitive against Assembly, so can C#,Go,D, <whatever language> have enough work placed into them, that eventually they will become competitive against C.
People believed they could make C competitive against Assembly, just like they believe they could make C++ competitive against C.
So it is a matter if one wants to believe and lead, or don't and follow.
Re:Create your own Game Engine but don't use it
by karmadog on Wednesday July 12, 2017 @06:54PM
(#14757382)
If <whatever language> makes certain assumptions and guarantees on behavior, then no, belief is not enough. It has to be plausible. GC alone really is a big issue and all the research (of which there is a lot) has not solved fundamental issues.
There are of course languages (like Rust) that have the fundamentals to match C/C++, but then it's still a matter of adoption. C++ also still develops.
"I have seen these words written against C, Turbo Pascal, Modula-2, C++."
So what? Those words probably had a good argument behind them, at the time.
In the MS-DOS days, compilers weren't as good as today, so handwritten ASM paid off.