that was my same feeling. I'm a C# developer, and even though I consider myself a decent dev, I never thought of C# as a toy language. I guess I'm not that good.
Until the author has made systems like Stack Overflow, Exchange, IIS, Office 365, and SharePoint in C++, his comments about C# being a "toy language for small projects" are pretty much baseless. In fact, this entire article is nothing more than an academic exercise, he has no practical examples where any of his concerns had a significant impact on a production system.
I guess more specifically, why can't I write C++ in C#.
As a side note, the i7 4770k produces somewhere in the region of one hundred thirty-three billion seven hundred forty million operations per second. 8GB is sixty four billion bits.
We don't really need micro optimisations and bitflags anymore. Premature optimisation causes loads more problems than it actually solves. That's why we have languages like Java and C#.
9 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 29.6 ms ] threadAs a side note, the i7 4770k produces somewhere in the region of one hundred thirty-three billion seven hundred forty million operations per second. 8GB is sixty four billion bits.
We don't really need micro optimisations and bitflags anymore. Premature optimisation causes loads more problems than it actually solves. That's why we have languages like Java and C#.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instructions_per_second
One must eventually compromise in every language/system at some cost according to the value to its intended user
Many of these genuinely interesting criticisms of C# are the "other edge" to the sword we love it for