C is a language, not an implementation. You can JIT C just like any other programming language.
Irrelevant, we all know what he's talking about, and whether it's gcc, llvm or icc, his point stands.
It’s Faster Because It’s C
11–20 of 122 posts
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#12"I’d even argue that the main reason kernel code tends to be efficient is not because it’s written in C but because it’s written with parallelism and reentrancy in mind, by people who understand those issues."
With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands performance by choosing C/C++ in the first place? (I am not saying anything about the performance of a certain language implementation)
The author also argues from a performance critical application perspective. What about desktop applications where perceived performance rather acts like a quality property? I know many people that shy away from using desktop Java and even .NET applications simply because they feel sluggish and waste memory. I don't care if the Java application is as fast in pure algorithmic performance.
If I can choose between using two equivalent C/C++ or Java/.NET applications I will choose the C/C++ application. I still think this is a good assumption.
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#13There are a couple of excellent mailing list posts discussing the relative speed of JGit and Git, which are excellent reading:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/1180...
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/1180...
That said, there are probably very few applications that have been this heavily hand-optimised, and probably equally few where you actually need it. Where C really stomps Java is around very low level memory management, I think. With modern processors, code can benefit greatly from colocation of related data that can be very difficult to achieve in an idiomatic way with Java.
Edit: link layout
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#14Java leads the programmer into using bloated libraries, which absolutely litter the Java landscape. Its very hard to measure or even predict what effect a Java interface will have on your solution.
I agree with the author, the language has no intrinsic slowness, its the tendency to use a triply-nested abstraction for every trivial purpose (a hash table of objects containing references to a database API...) instead of Hey! a pointer, that lead the app programmer down the primrose path.
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#15"I’d even argue that the main reason kernel code tends to be efficient is not because it’s written in C but because it’s written with parallelism and reentrancy in mind, by people who understand those issues." With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands per…
"With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands performance by choosing C/C++ in the first place?"
No, not at all. First of all, don't assume that someone knows what they're doing just by choosing C or C++ over Java. There are plenty of dumb C/C++ programmers out there, and a well-written Java program is always going to outperform a poorly written C/C++ one.
Secondly, remember that Java programs may actually be faster than C/C++ programs. Programs written in C/C++ require more time and knowledge to performance tune. Writing something in Java (or other high-level language) allows the author to spend more time focusing on the big picture issues rather than having to deal with a lot of lower-level issues.
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#16"I’d even argue that the main reason kernel code tends to be efficient is not because it’s written in C but because it’s written with parallelism and reentrancy in mind, by people who understand those issues." With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands per…
"I’d even argue that the main reason kernel code tends to be efficient is not because it’s written in C but because it’s written with parallelism and reentrancy in mind, by people who understand those issues."
It's used to build kernels because it doesn't require multiples of the needed RAM in order for the memory management to be timely.
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#17A better title (IMHO) to the article would be "Compare results, not approaches.", as stated in the last sentence.
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#18When I was younger I would have agreed wholeheartedly with this article because he seems more knowledgeable. After a few years experience I would have disagreed with him. Now I'm experienced enough to realize I have no idea if he's right or wrong but he seems to make reasonable points.
I've only worked in I/O bound, memory bound, and CPU bound code before (but never at the same time.) My hats off to anyone or group that has to work in these types of situations. Guess that's why I'm not a kernel level developer.
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#19"I’d even argue that the main reason kernel code tends to be efficient is not because it’s written in C but because it’s written with parallelism and reentrancy in mind, by people who understand those issues." With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands per…
"With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands performance by choosing C/C++ in the first place?" No, not at all. First of all, don't assume that someone knows what they're doing just by choosing C or C++ over Java. There are plenty of dumb C/C++ programmers…
"Secondly, remember that Java programs may actually be faster than C/C++ programs. Programs written in C/C++ require more time and knowledge to performance tune. Writing something in Java (or other high-level language) allows the author to spend more time focusing on the big picture issues rather than having to deal with a lot of lower-level issues."
I'm not against Java and I'll even admit that theoretically I could imagine a situation where a Java program ended up being faster, but in reality, that never happens.
In reality, we always end up in situations like utorrent vs. azureus (for those that don't know, utorrent is written in c++ and pretty much better than azureus in every way). In fact, I can't really think of one instance where a piece of java software is better than an equivalent written in c or c++ (outside of developer tools, because those aren't really directly comparable anyway)
Re: It’s Faster Because It’s C
#20"I’d even argue that the main reason kernel code tends to be efficient is not because it’s written in C but because it’s written with parallelism and reentrancy in mind, by people who understand those issues." With this arguing, isn't it reasonable to assume that a project Foo written in C or C++ is faster than an equivalent written in Java simply because the author writing project Foo in C/C++ likely understands per…
Agree.
Plus, C/C++ programmer can do a refactoring or optimizing more in their code, even in low level, with the limit is only their time and skills, but in high level languages like Java/.NET optimizing level is stuck in VM.