C++ is faster…
June 12, 2011
…Google says so here.
- books (55)
- career (19)
- coding (117)
- ecns (39)
- excel (11)
- job (7)
- linkage (2)
- reading harris (22)
- trading (84)
- Uncategorized (8)
- viz (4)
- April 2013
- March 2013
- September 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- June 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- November 2010
- September 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- April 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
coding
linkage
trading
Pages
Categories
Archives
%d bloggers like this:
June 13, 2011 at 10:22 am
… it also required the most extensive tuning efforts, many of which were done at a level of sophistication that would not be available to the average programmer.
November 22, 2011 at 7:47 pm
Not just faster, but also much more efficient with memory utilization but apparently not so much with binary size. The Java JAR is 1/3rd the size of the C++ opt binary, but comparing bytecode with machine code is unfair (I wonder why they don’t native compile it). Neither Java nor Scala claim to be performance-competitive with C/C++. An interesting comparison would be FORTRAN, OCaml, and C++.