News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on C++11 and Ada 2012 - renaissance of native languages?. Parent comment

Re:C++11 and Ada 2012 - renaissance of native languages? by aidenn0 on Saturday June 23, 2012 @12:07PM (#4151103)
Don't forget "Requiring automatic dynamic memory management ("garbage collection") is several orders of magnitude less efficient than letting developers use stack and manual memory management"

This is kind of like saying "Writing in FORTRAN is several orders of magnitude less efficient than letting developers use assembly" yes, a smart enough engineer can write assembly that is, at worst, no slower than FORTRAN (proof by fact that FORTRAN compiles to assembly). But this doesn't mean that on real-world projects FORTRAN won't win.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:C++11 and Ada 2012 - renaissance of native languages? by spitfire on Saturday June 23, 2012 @01:19PM (#4151275)
Ada actually has the sane memory management by default compared to both C++ and Java.

Pointers are, by default verboten. Pointer arithmetic will generate a compiler warning.

People should genuinely look into this stuff more rather than just dismissing it offhand. Ada got almost everything right for a procedural-OOP language. It was just too far ahead of its time.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:C++11 and Ada 2012 - renaissance of native languages? by jonathansizz on Saturday June 23, 2012 @12:56PM (#4151226)
The article was claiming that C++ failed in the 90s with the large migration from C++ to Java; it 'failed' at being the general-purpose industry language of choice. This is a reasonable statement.

And Java is often 1-2 orders of magnitude less efficient at memory usage than C++, so while 'several' is perhaps hyperbolic the general point still stands (execution speed wasn't being discussed).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:C++11 and Ada 2012 - renaissance of native languages? by aidenn0 on Monday June 25, 2012 @08:55PM (#4159582)
Java is not the only runtime with automatic dynamic memory management. I could run comparisons against "tcc" and conclude that java is an order of magnitude faster than C.
[ Parent | on HN ]