On 29/09/2010 2:52 AM, Cédric Beust ? wrote:
A fair assessment of C++ overall, except for that bit:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 6:17 AM, Kevin Wright
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Object allocation in Java is essentially free. In C++, malloc is
expensive.
I don't recall malloc() (or new) ever even showing up in profiling
traces. Ever.
In a product I worked on a while back we got a 20%+ performance boost
only by changing the memory allocator. (It might have been more.) No
other change to the code - just replace the malloc library. So I think
it depends on the nature of the code, how multithreaded it is etc. We
found malloc was the single biggest performance impact we had.
I did a lot of C++ programming, now mainly do Java programming, at least
when they let me! These days I tend to manage developers who now get
to do the fun stuff.
I find the Java development environment and tools (IDE, junit,
continuous build, etc) much better and helps people be more productive.
E.g. Javadoc build into the IDE to make it quick to see what a function
does - it just saves that bit of messing around. (Note: I am talking
Linux based C++ - not .NET Visual Studio, which I have not used much.)
C++ I think gives you a lot more control when you care about
performance, but Java is not bad. Doing a project at the moment where
we have to receive and process 3 million data structure updates per
second. Managed to get it going in Java on an 8-core server box. We
estimated 50% extra development time would have been required to do the
project in C++. Would have been lest performance risk in C++, but
longer to do properly.
Alan
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java
Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
