4 ms·
Compiler writers have to use program transformation to do well on benchmarks. Developers who don't prioritize benchmarks probably don't use C, and if they do th
by prodigal_erik 10y ago
Compiler writers have to use program transformation to do well on benchmarks. Developers who don't prioritize benchmarks probably don't use C, and if they do they really shouldn't, because sacrificing correctness for speed is the only thing C is good for these days.
- junk_disposal 10y agoIn reality, that's why I think that neither Go nor Rust will ever replace C (Maybe C++, Java or Python), because nothing can replace C. C worked in the 70s, when a naive compiler + asm would work perfectly.
- Hydraulix989 10y agoWhy though? At the end of the day, both are pretty C-like.
- umanwizard 10y agoSpeed isn't the only reason to use C. I often use C not because it's fast, but because C is by far the simplest mainstream programming language. All these UB warts notwithstanding, no language's interface comes as close as C's to a basic, no-frills register machine.
- red75prime 10y agoYou don't need speed, but you want to write in a language, which is closest to assembly? Hmm. Interesting view on what is simple.
- umanwizard 10y agoMaybe we mean different things by the word "simple". What language do you think is simpler than C?
- adrianN 10y agoScheme, ML, Java, Lua...
- umanwizard 10y agoYeah, we must have different definitions of simplicity, as I expected. Just off the top of my head, Java has the following complexities that C lacks: exceptions, garbage collection, class inheritance, generics, and a very large standard library. What definition of simplicity are you using when you say Java is simpler than C?
- vyodaiken 10y agoOh please.