3 ms·
Because the Linux kernel is so important, and so difficult to replace, people will put up with whatever language inconveniences they must in order to get their
by jongraehl 16y ago
Because the Linux kernel is so important, and so difficult to replace, people will put up with whatever language inconveniences they must in order to get their contribution accepted.
Therefore, I don't see Linus' choice as having any larger significance.
I already know that C++ is a vastly superior language to C for small to medium scale programs where computational time+space efficiency is paramount.
- _0ffh 16y agoCome again, please? All computational time+space efficiency of C++ comes from the "C", not the "++" part!
- jongraehl 16y agoYou misunderstand - I'm just qualifying the experience I'm speaking from. I've used both languages, but only when time and space efficiency can't be sacrificed. I've never worked on a large program in either. Under those conditions, I know from experience that C++ is better. It allows me to abstract safely (I benefit from some compile time type-checking) with little or no run-time cost.
- Daramarak 16y agoExcuse me but C++ is only vastly superior of C if you are a C++ programmer and do not know C. I am a C++ programmer, and I would never make such a claim. And for time and space efficiency? That doesn't make sense.
- jongraehl 16y agoI know C and C++ very well. I don't use either language unless I need to be as efficient as possible.