On Monday, 24 March 2014 at 11:57:14 UTC, Daniel Davidson wrote:
On Saturday, 22 March 2014 at 17:30:45 UTC, TJB wrote:
On Saturday, 22 March 2014 at 16:35:07 UTC, Brian Rogoff wrote:
This is a very interesting thread that you started. Could you
flesh it out more with some example C++ that you'd like
compared to D? I'm sure quite a few people would assist with
a translation.
Well, right away people jumped to high-frequency trading.
Although that may be the most visible area in computational
finance - it's not the only one. There are areas where
performance is crucial, but where trading is done at a lower
frequency (where latency is not the main issue).
I apologize for that. HFT has been a driver of a lot of
business and attention. Of course you are right about areas
with less latency sensitivity and D is attractive there. Even
in latency sensitive efforts I think could be D attractive for
new efforts providing some of the memory management efforts
continue to evolve. My main point was selling it would be tough.
Thanks
Dan
Dan,
Thanks for your thoughtful points. I think your experience is
worth listening to - I think it confirms that both:
* D is worth pursuing in these areas
* It won't be easy to convince others to adopt it
These points are worth thinking deeply about as D is developed
for the real world.
TJB
