3 ms·
I want to point something nobody ever talk about : Efficient data containers. For instance, Haskell and C++ come in standard with a lot of these (maps, sets,
by raphaelj 14y ago
I want to point something nobody ever talk about :
Efficient data containers.
For instance, Haskell and C++ come in standard with a lot of these (maps, sets, various linked lists, ...) whereas the C standard doesn't come with anything like this.
Moreover, type parameters and templates from these languages make usage of such structures easier and safer.
I've seen some C codes where programmers has used sub-effective containers to answer the problem (like arrays or simple linked lists) as they were lazy to use a non-standardized or to implement a faster but also more complex container. In C++ or Haskell, these efficient structures come for free.
Also, we can say the same for algorithms and concurrency. Haskell awesome safety and expressiveness made it really easy for me to implement such complex yet efficient systems.
These two features of high level languages tend to build ofter faster programs in those languages.
- Snoptic 14y agoHaskell maps, being persistent, aren't anywhere close to efficient for mutable maps.