News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Comparison of C++17, Go, and Java for a next-generation sequencing tool. Parent comment

Re:Comparison of C++17, Go, and Java for a next-generation s... by llm on Friday April 24, 2020 @02:55AM (#22965354)
they clearly want the performance - the algorithms (as you can easily see in the repo) are trivial, its just a huge amount of data to process

C++ can shine here - and still looking nearly like the go or Java-Code (due to the simple algorithm) but some one tried to write highly sophisticated code (there is no tutorial or book about C++ that teaches you to do it that way) with the result that C++ is far more slower then possible - we definitly not talking about 10% gain here

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Comparison of C++17, Go, and Java for a next-generation s... by movedx on Sunday April 26, 2020 @12:48AM (#22984524)
> they clearly want the performance - the algorithms (as you can easily see in the repo) are trivial, its just a huge amount of data to process

> C++ can shine here

And my point is: it didn't. And it didn't because of the learning curve involved. It's only the better solution if the knowledge is invested in ahead of time, and if the gains don't outweigh those you'd get from Go by an amount that greatly exceeds the time invested to net them, then it's not the better choice.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Comparison of C++17, Go, and Java for a next-generation s... by cppbert on Monday April 27, 2020 @09:22AM (#22995567)
but your point is just not correct - i know go, Java and C++ very well and i don't understand why the C++ code isn't just like the Java code - there is absolutely no need for this deep nested, ugly, container parties that are not in the Java code at all
[ Parent | on HN ]