[PD] [offtopic] Re: That C++ is slower thing again

Jerome Etienne jme at off.net
Sun Nov 23 18:05:47 CET 2003

On Sun, Nov 23, 2003 at 03:16:22PM +0100, guenter geiger wrote:
> C++ can't be slower then C, because it is a superset of C, so every
> line of fast code that you can write in C can be written in C++ too.

i think i understand what you mean and even agree with it. i will just
formulate it like "the 20% of code which use 80% of the time could
be written in pure C and make the speed of c++ code similar enougth to 
c code to become negligable". (reference to the old rule: 80% of
the time consumed by a code is often only 20% of the code)

nevertheless your argument doesnt hold in its formulation, c++
has more overhead at running time that C, an overhead which reduce
its speed. if you write the 20% of code which use 80% of the time
in C, and the 80% of your code which use 20% of the time in c++,
your code *IS* slower, simply in a negigeable way. 

if you write all your code in C, your c++ code is as fast as C 
code, it is pure c, no more c++ even if it is embedded in 
a .cpp file.

ps: it is a rather pedantic arguement which doesnt intend to start
    any flame war, i dont even believe it is actually relevant
    in the current discussion, that's why i put [offtopic] in
    the topic :)

More information about the Pd-list mailing list