[erlang-questions] Troll bait: If your code really matters, you'll write it in C++

[Richard O'Keefe]

On 3/04/2012, at 10:33 PM, Hendrik Visage wrote:

> http://blog.achrissmith.com/2012/03/if-your-software-matters-you-will-write.html
> 
> No, I didn't say it, I just snickered at the "definition":
> <quote>
> 
> Definition: "software which matters"
> 
> "Software which matters" is defined as:
> - Software which is used by hundreds of millions of people daily.
> - Software which generates billions of dollars in income annually.
> </quote>

The justification given for "if it matters ... you will use C++" is

> The point isn't to claim that C++ is the "one true language",
> but rather that any benefit a programming language has for the
> programmer doesn't matter.  If writing code in language X makes
> you 100x more productive but produces slow code, then all your
> users will notice is that your programs are slow.

As the Spartans famously said, "IF!"

The article appears to be a joke.
C++ is indeed *capable* of producing very good performance (as are
Fortran and Ada) but you have to be careful to write very simple
very clean obvious code to get there, and it really pays to use
things like objects (easily hidden huge memory management overheads)
and templates (easily hidden mind-numbingly vast code bloat) with
vigilant trepidation (thanks for that phrase, Rex Stout).

Jon Harrop of Flying Frog never tires of pointing out benchmarks
where a "managed" language produces code *faster* than C++.

Me, I'm just tired of people saying how efficient C++ is who
look blank when you ask them "what optimisation options did you
use? what profiler did you use?"