Languages popularity

Discussion in 'C++' started by Ufit, Sep 14, 2005.

  1. Ufit

    Ufit Guest

    http://www.dedasys.com/articles/language_popularity.html

    According to above informations C# is the most sought and perspective language.
    This seems very strange for me. Can anyone explain why there are so high hopes
    with C#? Why not C++ or java or VB?
    What's so better about C#?

    UF
    Ufit, Sep 14, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ufit wrote:
    > http://www.dedasys.com/articles/language_popularity.html
    >
    > According to above informations C# is the most sought and perspective
    > language. This seems very strange for me. Can anyone explain why
    > there are so high hopes with C#? Why not C++ or java or VB?
    > What's so better about C#?


    Nothing. Ask those people who share the views presented on that
    web page. I think it's bogus to derive "perspectiveness" from hits
    or dollars of advertisement poured into some proprietary system by
    the owner and its affiliates.

    V
    Victor Bazarov, Sep 14, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ufit wrote:
    > http://www.dedasys.com/articles/language_popularity.html
    >
    > According to above informations C# is the most sought and perspective language.
    > This seems very strange for me. Can anyone explain why there are so high hopes
    > with C#? Why not C++ or java or VB?
    > What's so better about C#?
    >
    > UF
    >
    >


    This just proves that C# customers are more willing to pay others to
    solve their problems for them.

    john
    John Harrison, Sep 14, 2005
    #3
  4. Ufit

    Divick Guest

    Well in my view C# indeed is a well designed language. It is more of a
    conglomerate of ideas/good features from C++ and Java (the major reason
    for its success and popularity).

    Every langauage has an evolution period. C++ has stopped evolving (may
    be not at the pace at which C# or Java has evolved). While Java is also
    a popular language but is not preferred by those who want speed in
    their code. Though the best part about Java is that it allows backward
    compatibility (older program still continue to work, with only warnings
    showing the code as deprecated for non supported constructs / language
    freatures / methods). Thus java is extensively used for Web development
    stuff.

    Since C# derives most of its ideas from Java but being Microsoft
    proprietary, supposedly runs faster on Windows based platforms than
    Java.

    May be it is difficult with C++ to evolve it so rapidly, which is the
    reason, people are looking for options so that they can do rapid
    application dcevelopment. But as far as speed goes no body can beat
    C++. That's why it is still used widely in scientific and R&D
    communities.
    Divick, Sep 14, 2005
    #4
  5. Ufit

    Howard Guest

    "Divick" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > stuff.
    >
    > Since C# derives most of its ideas from Java


    Actually, much of the design of C# comes from Delphi (a Pascal language).
    One of Delphi's main designers took on the task of developing the C#
    language, and he brought a lot of the Delphi design ideas with him.

    -Howard
    Howard, Sep 14, 2005
    #5
  6. Ufit

    mlimber Guest

    Divick wrote:
    [snip]
    > Every langauage has an evolution period. C++ has stopped evolving (may
    > be not at the pace at which C# or Java has evolved).

    [snip]

    I'm not clear on what you mean here. Sure, C++ is pretty stable
    compared to C# or Java, but it is still evolving, especially the
    standard library.

    > May be it is difficult with C++ to evolve it so rapidly, which is the
    > reason, people are looking for options so that they can do rapid
    > application dcevelopment.


    Huh?

    > But as far as speed goes no body can beat
    > C++. That's why it is still used widely in scientific and R&D
    > communities.


    Well, pure C can often beat C++ in speed of execution, and assembler
    can beat that. Speed of development is another thing, however. :)

    Cheers! --M
    mlimber, Sep 14, 2005
    #6
  7. Ufit

    Howard Guest

    "mlimber" <> wrote in message
    >
    >> May be it is difficult with C++ to evolve it so rapidly, which is the
    >> reason, people are looking for options so that they can do rapid
    >> application dcevelopment.

    >
    > Huh?
    >


    Perhaps he didn't word that well, but if you've ever developed in a language
    like Delphi, you'll find that it's easier to develop many types of software
    (esp. database, xml, gui, and other non-c++-standard stuff), in a short
    period of time, than it is when using C++. I can write a windows app with
    those features in no time, while doing so in C++ takes significantly longer.
    Granted, part of that ease is the IDE, and part is the libraries you use to
    develop such apps with. But the standard C++ language itself doesn't make
    it easy to do such things. (Indeed, it doesn't even know about such
    things!) C++ is not considered a RAD tool in this sense, and I think that's
    what he was referring to.

    -Howard
    Howard, Sep 14, 2005
    #7
  8. "Divick" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > May be it is difficult with C++ to evolve it so rapidly, which is the
    > reason, people are looking for options so that they can do rapid
    > application dcevelopment. But as far as speed goes no body can beat
    > C++. That's why it is still used widely in scientific and R&D
    > communities.


    D can beat C++ for speed. See
    http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=dlang&lang2=gp
    p&sort=fullcpu and see the benchmark at the end of
    http://www.digitalmars.com/d/cppstrings.html.

    -Walter
    www.digitalmars.com C, C++, D compilers
    Walter Bright, Sep 14, 2005
    #8
  9. In article <>,
    Divick <> wrote:
    >Well in my view C# indeed is a well designed language. It is more of a
    >conglomerate of ideas/good features from C++ and Java (the major reason
    >for its success and popularity).


    That doesn't make it a well-designed language. If anything, it makes
    it less likely to be; the more good ideas or features are included in
    a language, the more care it needs to be kept well-designed.


    > While Java is also
    >a popular language but is not preferred by those who want speed in
    >their code.


    ....except the people who realize that well-written Java with a good JIT
    engine will be comparable with code from any other language, especially
    when it's doing stuff that Java is good at.


    > But as far as speed goes no body can beat
    >C++.


    Except Fortran, especially for the type of number-crunching that most
    applications where run times are measured in weeks instead of seconds do.
    And probably C in a lot of cases. And sometimes assembly. And, depending
    on what you're doing, almost definitely some specialized language (like,
    say, Matlab).

    So, yeah, no other language except for most of the rest of the ones with
    serious market share.


    dave

    --
    Dave Vandervies
    There is an international standard unit for just about every measurable
    quantity, and the US ignores most of them.
    --Joona I Palaste in comp.lang.c
    Dave Vandervies, Sep 14, 2005
    #9
  10. mlimber wrote:

    [snip]

    > Well, pure C can often beat C++ in speed of execution.


    I question the truth of this statement. Can you provide an example of
    a C program that is faster when compiled as a C program than as a C++
    program? And if that's not what you meant, then what overhead do you
    believe a program using C++ idioms brings that results in it being
    slower than an equivalent C program that doesn't use those idioms?

    Best regards,

    Tom
    Thomas Tutone, Sep 14, 2005
    #10
  11. Ufit

    mlimber Guest

    Thomas Tutone wrote:
    > mlimber wrote:
    > > Well, pure C can often beat C++ in speed of execution.

    >
    > I question the truth of this statement. Can you provide an example of
    > a C program that is faster when compiled as a C program than as a C++
    > program? And if that's not what you meant, then what overhead do you
    > believe a program using C++ idioms brings that results in it being
    > slower than an equivalent C program that doesn't use those idioms?


    I was thinking of both languages without any compiler optimization
    except what is intrinsic to the languages (e.g., #define and inline,
    the latter of which is actually only a hint to the compiler and which
    may be ignored while the former cannot be). Second, as you note, most
    any C program will run under C++, but I was thinking of a "pure" C and
    a "pure" C++ program using their respective idioms.

    That being said, since any C++ program can be transformed into a "pure"
    C program, there's really not that much difference, save that the C++
    program (or the same program transformed into C) would have a few more
    pointers passed around and a few more dereferences before function
    calls. In general, I agree that these are negligible (though non-zero),
    so while my statement that C-style programs "can often beat" C++-style
    programs may be technically correct, in practice there *usually* isn't
    all that much difference.

    Cheers! --M
    mlimber, Sep 14, 2005
    #11
  12. Ufit

    Kai-Uwe Bux Guest

    mlimber wrote:

    > Divick wrote:
    > [snip]


    > Well, pure C can often beat C++ in speed of execution, and assembler
    > can beat that. Speed of development is another thing, however. :)


    Actually, I suspect with regard to C and C++ the converse might be closer to
    the truth. Templates are really powerful in that regard. The simplest
    example is probably comparing qsort from C to std::sort. The former
    requires the overhead of a function call whereas the latter will most like
    inline the comparison function. Thus, in C you have a tradeoff between
    generic code and fast code that you do not necessarily encounter in C++.


    Best

    Kai-Uwe Bux
    Kai-Uwe Bux, Sep 14, 2005
    #12
  13. Ufit

    Protoman Guest

    What's D? Never heard of that language.
    Protoman, Sep 15, 2005
    #13
  14. Sherm Pendley, Sep 15, 2005
    #14
  15. Ufit

    Divick Guest

    That's good to know. Thanks for correction.

    -divick
    Divick, Sep 15, 2005
    #15
  16. Ufit

    Divick Guest

    That's good to know. Thanks for correction.

    -divick
    Divick, Sep 15, 2005
    #16
  17. Ufit

    Divick Guest

    Yeah, that's what I meant. Indeed C++ is not a RAD tool.

    As far as speed goes, I consider C++ a subset of C (or superset
    depends on your perspective), so I don't distinguish between them
    practically.

    While with assembly, I feel if there was option of writing straightaway
    the machine code that would have been the fastest (only if you could
    optimize large and complex programs yourself without the compilers
    aid). Thus I don't consider it as a programming language altogether.

    Thanks Howard, once again, for the complementary note.
    Divick, Sep 15, 2005
    #17
  18. "Protoman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > What's D? Never heard of that language.


    This should help: www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html the D Programming
    Language
    Walter Bright, Sep 15, 2005
    #18
  19. Dave Vandervies wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > Divick <> wrote:
    > >Well in my view C# indeed is a well designed language. It is more of a
    > >conglomerate of ideas/good features from C++ and Java (the major reason
    > >for its success and popularity).

    >
    > That doesn't make it a well-designed language. If anything, it makes
    > it less likely to be; the more good ideas or features are included in
    > a language, the more care it needs to be kept well-designed.
    >
    >
    > > While Java is also
    > >a popular language but is not preferred by those who want speed in
    > >their code.

    >
    > ...except the people who realize that well-written Java with a good JIT
    > engine will be comparable with code from any other language, especially
    > when it's doing stuff that Java is good at.
    >
    >
    > > But as far as speed goes no body can beat
    > >C++.

    >
    > Except Fortran, especially for the type of number-crunching that most
    > applications where run times are measured in weeks instead of seconds do.
    > And probably C in a lot of cases. And sometimes assembly. And, depending
    > on what you're doing, almost definitely some specialized language (like,
    > say, Matlab).


    in what cases matlab can beat c++?
    two year's ago c was better. anything changes from that time?
    sorry if OT.
    Aleksey Loginov, Sep 15, 2005
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Norm Matloff

    STL popularity?

    Norm Matloff, Apr 22, 2005, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    797
    Gerry Quinn
    Apr 24, 2005
  2. Alex Martelli
    Replies:
    33
    Views:
    810
    Terry Reedy
    Nov 12, 2003
  3. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    291
    Rene Pijlman
    Nov 3, 2003
  4. Stewart Midwinter
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    426
  5. Rumo
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    198
Loading...

Share This Page