On Friday, 14 December 2012 at 20:33:33 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
(I actually did that once, many years ago, for a real app that
actually
made a sale or two. It was a good learning experience, and
helped me
improve my coding skills just from knowing how the machine
actually
works under the hood, as well as learning why it's so important
to write
code in a well-structured way -- you have no choice when doing
large-scale coding in assembler, 'cos otherwise your assembly
code
quickly devolves into a spaghetti paste soup that no human can
possibly
comprehend. So I'd say it was a profitable, even rewarding
experience.
But I wouldn't do it again today, given the choice.)
T
Yeah, I did that too long ago and I'm happy to have learned the
skills because it's the ultimate coding experience imaginable. If
you don't do it very carefully, it goes all to hell just like you
say. Best to let the machines do it these days, even if I could
do it 10x better, it'll take me 100's of years to do what I can
do now in a day.
Everyone, thanks for the responses. I got some great ideas
already to try out. I think at the end of the day, my code will
be better performing than my old C++ version simply because I
will be considering the costs of memory allocations which was
something I really never thought about much before. I guess
that's the positive side effect to the negative side effect of
using a GC. I agree like many of you have commented, having a GC
is a pro-con trade off, positive in some ways, but not all.
Optimize only where you need to, and let the GC deal with the
rest.
--rt
