Insulted for using C++?

This is a discussion on Insulted for using C++? within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by bithub If inline assembly was the big winner for C/C++, I would have switched to a different ...

  1. #91
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by bithub View Post
    If inline assembly was the big winner for C/C++, I would have switched to a different language years ago. In the last 10 years, I think I've used inline assembly once (and I found out later that it wasn't even needed).
    I've written entire (non-trivial) applications in assembly.

    That's not true. Using adaptive optimization, a Java program could (in theory) perform faster than an equivalent C++ program. In practice, this doesn't happen often today, but it could become a more common occurrence in the future. The JIT compiler has been getting better and better over the years, so it's possible that through adaptive optimization (which the HotSpot JIT compiler already uses) that Java is actually faster than C++ in the future.
    Ultimately the JIT compiler executes machine code, C/C++ executes machine code. C/C++ executes on average 1 instruction per language feature.

    JIT must at a minimum execute at least 3

    1. Load the next bytecode
    2. jump to the appropriate section of the interpreter
    3. execute the code that does what the bytecode stands for.

    regardless of ho efficient step 3 is it can never be faster than the same functionality implemented in C/C++ since C/C++ could simply use inline assembly to perform the exact same sequence of machine code. And then Java has to perform steps 1 and 2 while C/C++ does not.

    If you mean you can take 2 equally poorly implemented horribly cumbersome and completely non-optimized programs and that JIT will eventually run faster than C/C++ perhaps, but No language can guarantee good performance if you intentionally cripple it with poorly written code.

    C/C++ will never lose because it can always just implement a java interpreter and achieve parity of performance.
    Last edited by abachler; 09-18-2009 at 11:17 PM.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  2. #92
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,167
    The compilation cost can possibly be amortized because the most commonly run code sections and functions will be compiled to machine code. The JIT compiler can also dynamically re-compile parts of the program (and re-optimize) using profile data from the run. That makes it theoretically possible to be faster than C.

  3. #93
    Guest Sebastiani's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Waterloo, Texas
    Posts
    5,655
    I've written entire (non-trivial) applications in assembly.
    That's an interesting point, and completely true IMO. I've seen some extremely nice GUI apps written in straight assembler, as well as some impressive, computationally complex programs (Jeremy Gordon's 'Go' tools, for example). It makes me kind of envious, actually.

  4. #94
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by cyberfish View Post
    The compilation cost can possibly be amortized because the most commonly run code sections and functions will be compiled to machine code. The JIT compiler can also dynamically re-compile parts of the program (and re-optimize) using profile data from the run. That makes it theoretically possible to be faster than C.
    No it doesn't. It only makes it theoretically eventually as fast as C. And the key words there are theoretically, eventually, and AS FAST, not faster.
    Last edited by abachler; 09-18-2009 at 11:30 PM.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  5. #95
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    Abachler, you're assuming that the C programmer in this case produces perfect machine code, which implies the following:
    1) He knows his compiler so thoroughly that he can formulate C code that produces exactly the assembly he wants; alternatively, he writes large slabs of inline assembly, but then he's no longer programming in C.
    2) He knows his target machine so perfectly that he can make all the right instruction selection and scheduling decisions.
    These two assumptions are ridiculous to make about the general programming population, but they're not the worst, because this further implies:
    3) The compiler will always remain the same. Different compilers generate different code.
    4) The target machine will always remain the same. Different CPUs have different optimal schedules.
    Adaptive optimization can optimize for the machine the code is running on, no matter where it runs.

    So what does this say? It says that theoretically, under ideal circumstances you can get the fastest possible implementation of an algorithm in C, in which case Java cannot beat it. But if the implementation is not the fastest possible one, then an adaptive optimizer can eventually catch up and overtake the other code.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  6. #96
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee View Post
    So what does this say? It says that theoretically, under ideal circumstances you can get the fastest possible implementation of an algorithm in C, in which case Java cannot beat it. But if the implementation is not the fastest possible one, then an adaptive optimizer can eventually catch up and overtake the other code.
    Sloppy implementations will only optimize so far. A highly optimized bubble sort will still be a bubble sort, the AO wont magically turn it into a threaded merge sort. If your argument that AO can beat C only if you cripple the strength of C (closeness to the hardware) in order to gain a position where AO can beat it, then yes, in which case I can simply claim that if you cannot use AO then even sloppy C can stomp the living crap out of java. SO yes, a C programmer writing in java for the first time will probably write faster code than a java programmer coding in C for the first time, and that makes C the weaker language how...?

    If you code in C you need to think like a machine so that your code will be fast and efficient, like a machine. If you code in java you can think like a human and write code that is sloppy and error prone, like a human, then rely on the compiler to fix most of your mistakes.

    Looking around at the members taking part in this discussion I really don't see too many that aren't experienced enough to hand optimize their code for the specific platform it is running on. So again, when performance is critical people will optimize their code, and C lets you optimize your code much more than java, leading to better absolute performance. Because C allows you to use inline assembly, which is a language feature of C/C++, it ultimately lets you achieve the fastest possible code. In absolutely no universe whatsoever can java AO come up with ANY optimized sequence of machine instructions that cannot be simply copy and pasted into C as inline assembly. Thus it is theoretically IMPOSSIBLE for java to EVER beat C in performance. The only way it can beat C in practical use is if you use crippled code to begin with, and then you aren't testing the performance of the programming language, but rather the programmer.

    edit - added clarification in magenta
    Last edited by abachler; 09-19-2009 at 08:25 AM.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  7. #97
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,412
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
    I disagree. C# has been certified by ECMA and Microsoft does not own nor maintain the standard. It is no different than say ActionScript which is also ECMA certified which means Adobe had to give up the rights to it and follow whatever standards the ECMA committee set forth. Because C# is ECMA certified this means that MS cannot just change things at the drop of a hat. They must conform the standard if they want ECMA's approval of it. There is no inherent danger in developing C# applications. They will work and be supported long into the future. C# is certainly here to stay.
    This is where Java utterly failed. Sun was not willing to give up the rights to the language and/or standard. Perhaps that has changed now but I do not know since I do not use Java.
    I should have clarified. The problem here is that conferring ownership to a Standards body didn't change much in terms of C# implementation since the patents issues are still very unclear, at best.

    I very much doubt a third-party (which is not linked to Novell) open-source or commercial endeavor taking to themselves the task of creating a new C# implementation will not be met by fierce opposition from Microsoft. Furthermore, while not entirely sure of all implications (feel free to fill me in) I very much doubt that without many of those patented technologies, a third-party C# implementation will be anything more than just,

    "A programing language totally unrelated to C# that just happens to have the same syntax and that cannot fulfill the standard in its entirety over patent issues".

    In other words, they pretty much control the language because they are pretty much the only ones interested in implementing it. The fact Mono has been constantly under the fear of possible lawsuits which have even forced the delay of certain features to acquire either formal authorization or clarification, doesn't make anyone comfortable. I understand there were recent developments on this field, with Microsoft stating something in the lines of "we pledge to not sue anyone". But then I hear that this pledge does still not extend to the whole of the framework. So it's still confusing... and I don't see anyone motivated into creating C# implementations. Do you?

    The power of a programming language like C# is not to be mocked. That much we agree. I've just recently made changes to my VS installation to finally include .Net development support and plan to follow through with my apprenticeship soon enough. But C# will remain forever a Microsoft controlled Windows programming language. And I'll happily eat my hat if I'm ever proved wrong.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  8. #98
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,590
    But C# will remain forever a Microsoft controlled Windows programming language. And I'll happily eat my hat if I'm ever proved wrong.
    Eat your hat eh? That would be fun to watch.

    AFAIK ECMA controls C# but if MS is attempting to sue for Mono then that does not bode well since it indicates they still feel they have some type of 'ownership' over it. They would do well to relenquish control over it since that is the only time it will gain popularity. Perhaps they are threatening to sue since Mono might represent a threat, albeit small, to the Windows OS. Last I checked Linux only had a 0.7% OS market share (Feb. 2009) and Mac had 9%. That leaves MS with roughly 90% of the OS market share. They used to have about 95 to 96 percent share so maybe they are trying to regain some of that by squashing the little guy again.
    Last edited by VirtualAce; 09-19-2009 at 09:06 PM.

  9. #99
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,167
    Even if it is standardized, if they still control 99% of the market (IDE), it won't help. They can just do what they did with IE and HTML. Make the implementation intentionally buggy (according to the standard), with a lot of extensions. People won't find problems with that, because 99% of them would be using M$ IDE and reading M$ doc. And people writing new code won't care about sticking to the standard because it is extra work, and 99% of C# developers use M$ IDE anyways. If we take a look at the web standards counterpart, it has been the case for many years (developers only develop for IE), despite the fact that there is a standard in place. It only changed recently (in the past few years) because Firefox gained significant market share, and developers started to realize that the web is not just about IE. It was really hard for Firefox (and other "alternative browsers") to take off, though, because of the chicken-and-egg problem - if people don't use alternative browsers, developers won't make their sites work with them, and so people won't use alternative browsers because they "don't work" on many sites.

    Why will C# be different? It's the exact same situation. There is a standard in place, but their implementation has close to 100% market share.

    A standard doesn't mean much if people don't follow it.

  10. #100

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,041
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    Java and C# are the easy button of programming languages. Great for writing flash ads that try to sell natural male enhancements, but not really for serious high performance computing. I don't think Java has support for CUDA is what I'm saying. i also don't think anyone is tarded enough to write an OS in C#.
    Really could not have said it any better.
    I'm not immature, I'm refined in the opposite direction.

  11. #101
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,246
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
    I disagree. C# has been certified by ECMA and Microsoft does not own nor maintain the standard. It is no different than say ActionScript which is also ECMA certified which means Adobe had to give up the rights to it and follow whatever standards the ECMA committee set forth. Because C# is ECMA certified this means that MS cannot just change things at the drop of a hat. They must conform the standard if they want ECMA's approval of it. There is no inherent danger in developing C# applications. They will work and be supported long into the future. C# is certainly here to stay.
    This is where Java utterly failed. Sun was not willing to give up the rights to the language and/or standard. Perhaps that has changed now but I do not know since I do not use Java.
    Java (Sun's compiler and JVM) has been released under the GPL. It is leaps and bounds more open than C# is (and ever will be most likely).
    bit∙hub [bit-huhb] n. A source and destination for information.

  12. #102
    {Jaxom,Imriel,Liam}'s Dad Kennedy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    1,065
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba View Post
    Eat your hat eh? That would be fun to watch.

    AFAIK ECMA controls C# but if MS is attempting to sue for Mono then that does not bode well since it indicates they still feel they have some type of 'ownership' over it. They would do well to relenquish control over it since that is the only time it will gain popularity. Perhaps they are threatening to sue since Mono might represent a threat, albeit small, to the Windows OS. Last I checked Linux only had a 0.7% OS market share (Feb. 2009) and Mac had 9%. That leaves MS with roughly 90% of the OS market share. They used to have about 95 to 96 percent share so maybe they are trying to regain some of that by squashing the little guy again.
    Ya know, bubba, those kind of statistics are just plain BULL CRAP!!! The fact of the matter that there are too many variables to determine what % each has. For example, of the embedded world, Linux rules with a nice margin at 60%.

    I mean, really, if we said Of the 34 year old, 225 lbs, white, lives in Alabama, male, married, drives jeep, jeep is black, just bought a new house, brown headed people use Linux on a day to day basis as our poll, the outcome would be 100%.

    How many embedded systems are there versus desktops?

  13. #103
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,246
    Quote Originally Posted by Kennedy View Post
    Ya know, bubba, those kind of statistics are just plain BULL CRAP!!! The fact of the matter that there are too many variables to determine what % each has. For example, of the embedded world, Linux rules with a nice margin at 60%.

    I mean, really, if we said Of the 34 year old, 225 lbs, white, lives in Alabama, male, married, drives jeep, jeep is black, just bought a new house, brown headed people use Linux on a day to day basis as our poll, the outcome would be 100%.

    How many embedded systems are there versus desktops?
    I think what he meant to say was the Desktop OS market share. This conveniently ignores embedded and server systems where Linux is more popular than Windows.
    bit∙hub [bit-huhb] n. A source and destination for information.

  14. #104
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    64
    ohmygodwhathappenhere?

    I just released my anger few days ago by telling everyone here that there are many java/C# people on my university hates C++ so much.

    Well, I know how to code in java because I have a class for it here. After I finished my class and getting a grade of 91/100 on it, I stop coding on it then continue studying advanced concepts in C++.

  15. #105
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by sarah22 View Post
    ohmygodwhathappenhere?

    I just released my anger few days ago by telling everyone here that there are many java/C# people on my university hates C++ so much.

    Well, I know how to code in java because I have a class for it here. After I finished my class and getting a grade of 91/100 on it, I stop coding on it then continue studying advanced concepts in C++.
    Touched a raw nerve I'm guessing.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21