Excerpts from Danesh Daroui's message of 2014-07-22 23:14:48 +0200:
> Wish you best luck! As Chris pointed out, when it comes to performance, you
> might not gain a lot if you migrate from C to Pike. However, extra tests
> never hurt. In your case, if you intend to write code for numerical
> simulations i.e. Monte Carlo technique, or Algebraic operation using LAPACK
> for example, then C might offer more mature solutions. 

but if pike helps you elsewhere you can always wrap your c-code in a CMOD (a
pike module written in C) and call it from pike.

> Pike (again as Chris mentioned) is excellent for text processing. It also
> offers garbage collector as well as strict type casting (similar to Ada)
> which would prevent faulty code and over/underflow errors.

btw, danesh, nice to see an article about pike published:
http://www.drdobbs.com/open-source/pike-programming-language/240168647

(can you share how the process of getting an article published at dr.dobb's 
works?)_

i'd love to see more, maybe something more specialized, some tricks from Turbo
for example, where you show off what exactly it is that makes pike a better
choice than other languages.

greetings, martin.

-- 
eKita                   -   the online platform for your entire academic life
-- 
chief engineer                                                       eKita.co
pike programmer      pike.lysator.liu.se    caudium.net     societyserver.org
BLUG secretary                                                 beijinglug.org
foresight developer  foresightlinux.org                            realss.com
unix sysadmin
Martin Bähr          working in china        http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/

Reply via email to