3 ms·

Calling one language better than another is subjective and open to interpretation. Clean might not be as important as critical mass in adoption, letting people

• naikrovek 7y ago
  That depends. If you are looking for a language that produces more work for the CPU per line of source code, that is definitely not subjective. Programming languages are not hard to learn for anyone that already knows one or more. Other important metrics no one thinks to measure: * Quality of compiled assembly or bytecode (it is dead easy to write a shitty compiler that produces stupid assembly or bytecode) * Runtime performance on tight loops (this is directly tied to cost when running on something like AWS Lambda, and code that performs well means you need to upgrade your hardware less often) * Lines of code required to achieve a given goal. Less is obviously better, when you understand that more code = more complexity, and that more complexity = higher likelihood of bugs. Also, if there is enough boilerplate code to break these guidelines, then what is that code doing, except slowing development times and slowing execution times? I can write a method two or more ways and know provably which is faster. No one does this! No one looks for hot spots and tries to optimize them. No one profiles anything if performance is deemed "good" or "not a problem." There is a lot of CPU time to be saved, a lot of RAM usage and cache optimization that no one does because they believe that their work is above being challenged, even by themselves. This world is insane.