> I think most programs are less latency sensitive than that. Hardly, compared to anything that takes user input and aims at 60/120 FPS (where you inevitably

> I think most programs are less latency sensitive than that. Hardly, compared to anything that takes user input and aims at 60/120 FPS (where you inevitably end up bypassing GC if you can't force it to run when you want to). https://www.quora.com/Is-Java-overtaking-C++-in-the-HFT-world https://www.quora.com/Is-Java-overtaking-C++-in-the-HFT-worl... > One thing about HFT is that the speed of the language oddly doesn't matter much. You are talking about latencies of 20 milliseconds, and any language can do 20 milliseconds since CPU times are measured in nano-seconds rather than milisecond. and > If you are playing in the sub 10 microsecond range doing everything in C++ helps a lot. [..] A lot of high frequency strategies run in the 20-30 microsecond time frame. I think this is where a lot of diversity in terms of setup occurs. and > To lower execution costs, we need a low latency system that has good determinism in response times. You cant pause for hash table rebucketing or garbage collectors or the OS taking away your time slice or moving you to a diferent processor or whatever. There are guys who try this in Java, and spend most of their time trying to make Java work deterministically. Good luck and > If you are in ultra HFT then C++ is the only answer (besides custom hardware - FPGA & ASIC). You just can't afford garbage collector.