|
If your software is fast but buggy all they'll notice is the bugs.
If your software is fast but new features (and change requests) are slow to arrive all they'll notice is the lack of features.
If your language of choice delivers good speed, mitigation of bugs, and fast development time then that's what they'll notice.
|
|
|
|
|
The other posters have nailed it - a clear case of deciding on a methodology before doing the analysis.
Peter Wasser
Art is making something out of nothing and selling it.
Frank Zappa
|
|
|
|
|
Can't say I disagree. The whole purpose of computers is computing speed.
|
|
|
|
|
If you develop a system that automates a task and the user can now do a hundred of the tasks in a day wheras before it took a week, they will think the system is fast. When new recruits start and se the system have a lot of waiting time, they will say it is slow. After optimising it to now do 150 a day, they will think it is fast. That is until some new recruits start...
In the end its all relative! It doesn't matter which development language you choose.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan Steyn wrote: It doesn't matter which development language you choose.
Except when it does (and for the record, I am currently using C# and JavaScript at work) When will better JITs save managed code?[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: The whole purpose of computers
And being less error-prone (once debugged anyway).
And relieving humans of tedious tasks.
At least this was the case with the very earliest computing machines.
|
|
|
|
|
And doing it to the business demands, while the business still values it (i.e. development cycle time is critical for many situations).
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: The whole purpose of computers is computing speed.
Errm, no. Reliable reproduction of calculations must play a large part. If you believe that processing speed is the all important guideline, then we should all be coding in Fortran or Assembly Language.
|
|
|
|
|
Finally. Someone std::gets<it>.
Nuclear launch detected
|
|
|
|
|
Attempting to load signature...
A NullSignatureException was unhandled.
Message: "No signature exists"
|
|
|
|
|
Just sayin'.
m.bergman
For Bruce Schneier, quanta only have one state : afraid.
To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered. -- Voltaire
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense. -- Steve Landesberg
I am not a chatbot.
|
|
|
|
|
Which Assembly? Will the Macro 11 for my VAX and Alpha port to my x86?
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: Will the Macro 11 for my VAX and Alpha port to my x86?
It doesn't matter. Portability was not a factor in the article. If you are looking for performance, then you write in assembly. If you don't care, you might as well write it in VB.
m.bergman
For Bruce Schneier, quanta only have one state : afraid.
To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered. -- Voltaire
Honesty is the best policy, but insanity is a better defense. -- Steve Landesberg
I am not a chatbot.
|
|
|
|
|
Of course we could take this further and say that assembly beats C++. Of course C is somewhere in between. You might even want to twiddle bits and just bypass the assembly language.
|
|
|
|
|
The author's "proof" contains the following statement:
Step 2: C and C++ are the fastest known programming languages*. (* ignoring Fortran.)
Of course! Ignore any evidence not in your favor!
Nuclear explosion simulations were written in Fortran and remain in Fortran.
I submit that software matters more than software for some crap like tracking rentals at a video store.
|
|
|
|
|
Just like at every other software development shop, we have struggled with the definition of "Done". Throughout the years we've had many definitions of "Done" with teams and individuals. Today each team has its own definitions of "Done" all through the lifecycle but the common denominator is that it culminates in "Done" from the perspective of our customers. It's not "Done" until the customer says it's "Done."
|
|
|
|
|
Theoretically, if you have a specification, when the code meets the spec. However, that does not seem to work very well either.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're not prepared, the old SQL Injection trick is a time-honored method of ruining your day (or week, or career). It's not magic, however, and both exploits and mitigations are well known. Use this cheat sheet to understand the problem and make sure your database code is secure. If you don't know the tricks, you're probably the target.
|
|
|
|
|
Put this as a permanent link on the Q&A forums.
Failure is not an option; it's the default selection.
|
|
|
|
|
Good read.
But why allow application users to run sp_oacreate for example? I believe that a lot of SQL injection attacks can already be stopped by having the appropriate permissions set to db objects
|
|
|
|
|
The biggest “killer app” for popular web development languages is how easy it is to build the most common application that mainstream novice-to-intermediate programmers are paid to build: Basic form-based applications. Today, Ruby on Rails rules the roost. But node.js is arguably even easier to pick up. Could it be the next big thing on the web? JavaScript already rules the browser, why not the whole stack?
|
|
|
|
|
Ruby rules my ass. There's plenty of Python and even C doing web work.
Nuclear launch detected
|
|
|
|
|
Julia is a new language for scientific computing that is winning praise from a slew of very smart people, including Harlan Harris, Chris Fonnesbeck, Douglas Bates, Vince Buffalo and Shane Conway. As a language, it has lofty design goals, which, if attained, will make it noticeably superior to Matlab, R and Python for scientific programming. Easier to read, fewer syntactic quirks and much faster than the R. What's not to love?
|
|
|
|
|
Veddy intellesting...
Perhaps a new answer to the perennial "what language should I teach my kid?" question?
|
|
|
|
|
How the Hippies Saved Physics is a history book about the origins of quantum information science, quantum computing, and quantum cryptography, currently hot, heavily funded fields in physics. The colorful characters of the Fundamental Fysiks Group.
|
|
|
|