3 ms·

I guess that statement is comparing C++ with other high level languages. Not assembly. After all, one can drop down to assembly from any language. But "theoreti

I guess that statement is comparing C++ with other high level languages. Not assembly. After all, one can drop down to assembly from any language. But "theoretically" is not interesting. What's more interesting is what is practically possible. Even Python can be made as fast as assembly by writing everything in the latter inside a Python shell, but those are unrealistic comparisons. Practically speaking C++ is difficult to beat, in terms of speed, from other languages at a similar level of abstraction.

skohan 4y ago
Yeah but the point would be, if you can beat C++ with assembly, then theoretically there can exist a compiler for another language which can compile to that same assembly, meaning C++ isn't at the theoretical limit. Maybe it's a nitpick, but it gives me a little bit of pause to see a statement like this on a language website's page, since it seems to indicate a bit of a weak or sloppy understanding of computer science fundamentals.