[MUD-Dev] Languages

Jon A. Lambert jlsysinc at ix.netcom.com
Sun May 25 14:16:45 New Zealand Standard Time 1997


> [Ben G:]
> 
> :I'm curious about some things.  What exactly makes c++ slower?  Is it
> :more class calls because most ppl make accessing class data a function 
> :call?	Perhaps inheritance mapping of some sort?  I head that a c++
> :compiler basically just translates the code into c before compile anyway..
> 
I would add that is largely a perception problem.  A certain "free" and 
widely obtainable compiler has decidely poor optimization compared to many
commercially obtainable compilers.  It is several years behind period.

The fact the C++ was initially implemented merely as a pre-compiler to 
native C adds to the perception that it can only be slower.

LISP has suffered from a similar perception ever since it was introduced
as an interpreted language.  The fact that many CLOS implementations
now compile natively and are extremely efficient seems to make no 
difference to many.

I believe that many COBOL compilers perform better optimization than
most C compilers.  Thats not an endorsement of COBOL as a good language
choice for what we are programming, BTW.  Its just an observation.


JL




More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list