I must have been unclear, because Eclipse is exactly what I am arguing against. The developers of Eclipse made a choice to write Eclipse in Java. Java is a la

I must have been unclear, because Eclipse is exactly what I am arguing against. The developers of Eclipse made a choice to write Eclipse in Java. Java is a language that trades performance for developer productivity with features like memory safety, garbage collection, and machine-independent byte-code. Though I wasn't there, I would suspect the rationale for this choice is that computers are "fast enough" that this tradeoff is worth it. The choice to use Java instead of C++ favored the productivity of the Eclipse developers over the run-time performance of Eclipse, and the effects of this choice are so painful that Eclipse has become the poster child of a sluggish desktop app. What I am arguing for is the idea that computers aren't "fast enough" to make compromises like this. Data-intensive applications will continue to be written in low-level languages. Even if a higher-level language could provide basic functionality that is "fast enough," a lower-level language will free up CPU resources that can be spent making the application even more compelling to the end-user. I hope this makes it clear why Eclipse is the antithesis of what I believe.