|
|
|
|
|
|
by cassandravoiton
5180 days ago
|
|
|
You shoot down our own argument. The video suggest C# and Java as alternatives to interpreted languages. By picking C you are deliberately trying to make your argument sound stronger than it is. The video also mentions the economic cost. From an economics point of view you are just wrong. Because of the vast numbers of computers used in 'scale out' architectures the impact of code efficiency is enormously bigger than the cost of developers. If a developer's code runs on 10 or 100 machines then you are correct. But modern software runs on hundreds or even hundreds of thousand machines. |
|
|
Most software that ships to hundreds of thousands of computers is software that must run on other people's machines. If it must, then it is automatically in the markets best interest to optimize to require less overhead since it will give them access to a larger portion of the market. If it is for their own internal servers, then again it is in the market's best interest to roll it in C or similar since they are able to make the distinction as to where it is worth it to convert it to a lower level language.