Vector.push_back pass by reference or value?
Pages: 12
Java is not improving, what is improving is the hardware |
Not true. Java made a huge (> 10x) progress in performance since version 1. There are still many optimisations being worked on, so more is expected to come up. Most of the optimisations used by C++ compilers are already implemented and now they are exploring things that a static compiler can never do. I'd expect more cases where it is extremely hard to get C++ up to performance of Java and even if you manage to outperform it, you are very unlikely to get more than a few % faster code. Not worth the money.
The unique reason big companies are using Java developers currently is because of money and productivity |
Yeah - productivity is more than 3x higher and there is virtually no performance loss. So the choice is obvious.
And you thing they're handling all that in just one computer/server.. |
That makes it only worse for C++, because writing distributed / multithreaded software in C++ is a big pain. And esentially if they have so many servers, they really need to get the top performance out of them. Keeping a big farm of servers costs *lots of bucks*. If they needed 3x as many Java servers as it is needed C++ servers, they would never consider Java. But you can claim they are idiots. Good luck.
By the way - actually someone already tried to create in C++ a fast distributed database engine similar to that used by Amazon/Google/Facebook. It is called HyperTable. The creators made usage of C++ and performance advantage their main selling point. That was the wrong move. They failed miserably:
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=hypertable%2C+cassandra%2C+hbase%2C+hadoop&l=
If C++ offered 10x performance improvement as it was 15 years ago, it would be a diffferent story. But it doesn't now and C++ programmers have to search for other features than performance to sell their products. You see, it really doesn't make any impression on anyone if your software is doing only 10% faster than the competition. And this only until heap fragmentation or memory leak gets in and your performance advantage is screwed up anyway...
---------------
I think we should end up this discussion here, because we are way off topic now.
Last edited on
| Not true. Java made a huge (> 10x) progress in performance since version 1. |
Hahahaha it seems very similar to the hardware progress since Java 1... I wonder why... If Java hadn't progressed 10X since Java 1, it wouldn't exist right now... When Java was a shit, C was a real good and fast language, and now that Java is more or less acceptable C++ (extension of C) still being a very good and fast language.
| Yeah - productivity is more than 3x higher and there is virtually no performance loss. So the choice is obvious. |
Yhea, C++ will always loose the battle in productivity terms. It's a programming language not meant to everybody, very difficult to get actually. And if you compare the speed of a Java program running on a Intel i7 and a C++ program running on a Pentium III, you might not notice the difference depending on the application. Now take a C++ program running on a Intel i7 and a Java program running on a Pentium III... The difference is obvious.
| That makes it only worse for C++, because writing distributed / multithreaded software in C++ is a big pain. |
Depends if you're a newbie or not...
| If they needed 3x as many Java servers as it is needed C++ servers, they would never consider Java. |
... Ok man... PCs are a loooot cheaper than programmers are, I would rather pay a programmer 2.200€/moths and buy 3 PCs than pay 4.200€/months and buy just one PC... I told you, Java is about money and productivity, not about speed.
| But it doesn't now and C++ programmers have to search for other features than performance to sell their products. You see, it really doesn't make any impression on anyone if your software is doing only 10% faster than the competition. And this only until heap fragmentation or memory leak gets in and your performance advantage is screwed up anyway |
Well, again, I'm not talking about marketing here... I use to program C++ very naturally... In the other hand I have seen a lot of people in trouble when programming even when they're using Java. No memory leaks, no errors, no bugs... I use to program all days and I don't see those. But yhea, Java is 3X easier, but isn't faster than C++, sorry if you wanted to think that way.
| I think we should end up this discussion here, because we are way off topic now. |
Yhea is true... The guy who made this thread must be thinking: "What the hell?!". :D
Hahahaha it seems very similar to the hardware progress since Java 1. |
I meant 10x improvement on the same hardware. If I accounted for hardware improvement, it would be like 100x or more. Old Java was interpreted, now it is compiled and optimised just as C++.
Depends .if you're a newbie or not... |
... Ok man... PCs are a loooot cheaper than programmers are, I would rather pay a programmer 2.200€/moths and buy 3 PCs than pay 4.200€/months and buy just one PC... I told you, Java is about money and productivity, not about speed. |
And here you are only saying you haven't got a slightest idea about big throughput business like Amazon , Facebook or Google. First, they don't hire newbies. Actually they are companies it is hardest to get into. Second, cost of keeping 3x as many servers is *not* just buying 3 times more PCs. Give such idea to any Google developer and he would just ROTFL.
but isn't faster than C++ |
I never claimed it to be much faster. Sometimes it is faster, sometimes it is slower. The differences are similar to that between various C++ compilers.
No memory leaks, no errors, no bugs... |
This statement disqualifies you as a professional programmer. So you are a newbie. I knew it!
| This statement disqualifies you as a professional programmer. So you are a newbie. I knew it! |
Tell it to my team...
Oh yeah, in Internet you can write *anything*. :D
EOT from my side.
EOT from my side.
Last edited on
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12