On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 09:26:30PM +0000, Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 at 21:02:13 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 03:45:44PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu via > > Digitalmars-d wrote: > > > https://www.quora.com/Why-hasnt-D-started-to-replace-C++ > > [...] > > > > I actually agree with all of his points, except one: C++'s "enormous > > performance advantage"?! Is he being serious? Or is his view > > biased by dmd's, erm, shall we say, "suboptimal" optimizer? > > Well, I understand what you mean, but there are more performance > related options for C++ than for any other language at the moment. I > don't use them, most people don't, but they exist. So for people that > care a lot about throughput there basically is no other "complete" > alternative...
Specific examples, please. What are some examples of these "performance related options"? T -- If it's green, it's biology, If it stinks, it's chemistry, If it has numbers it's math, If it doesn't work, it's technology.
