I as well disagree that "the higher language, the better". The bloat .NET adds to the application size for both processing, memory and drive usage is astronomical. Its like going back to Visual Basic and including the interpreter in your "compiled" application with your source code basically copy/pasted right into the final EXE output (Encrypted/obfuscated/whatever).
I don't write in .NET, but I do agree for a developer, it CAN be a lot easier with everything that language has to offer. The libraries and functions and procedures and mechanisms and whatever else included to make our jobs easier are numerous. But optimization goes out the window when your 'compiler' does nothing more than translate your code at run-time instead of converting it into byte-code the OS will understand and deal with more directly. Everything has to eventually work its way down to byte-code, but including the overhead of translating the language at run-time doesn't help in the least. On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Scott Doctor <scott at scottdoctor.com> wrote: > On 6/14/2015 3:00 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > >> The result is that that higher level the language you write in, the >> better. >> > > I disagree. The use of languages higher than C result in slow bloated > code. A language that calls a language that calls a language. Simple > programs become multi-megabyte resource hogs. I agree that C compilers are > able to optimize assembler code to a level that hand-coded assembler > probably could not achieve. The problem is that higher level languages are > not compiling to assembler, but compiling to the language below it. > > ------------ > Scott Doctor > scott at scottdoctor.com > ------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >
