4 ms·
Zero-cost abstraction. In most cases constructs in other languages either lack expressiveness (generics in C#) and/or induce runtime costs (boxing/unboxing, etc
by polskibus 8y ago
Zero-cost abstraction. In most cases constructs in other languages either lack expressiveness (generics in C#) and/or induce runtime costs (boxing/unboxing, etc.).
- krylon 8y agoIn many (most?) cases, you do not need the performance (which is why people use C#, Java, etc.). When the performance is needed, the burden of using C++ seems like a small price to pay[0], but a lot of the time, the expressiveness offered by C# or Java, etc. is entirely sufficient. Which is why "enterprisey" software is dominated by Java or .Net, and why certain software like Autodesk Inventor 3D is written in C++. [0] Which is why browser engines, etc., are written in C++. Maybe one day Rust will replace C++, but for the time being, C++ is the top of the abstraction/performance pyramid.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]