David Vallner wrote:
>  M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>    
> > How does C++ deliver "seriously performance critical" applications where
> > C can't? Are the optimizers/code generators better for C++ than they are
> > for C? I would think a pure C code would have *better* performance,
> > simply because the language is simpler and easier to optimize.
> >
> >     
> 
>  And conversely, what's the problem with using C++ instead of C for
>  performance-critical Ruby extensions or any "fast code"?
Absolutely nothing. I know of several high-performance (and quite 
well-structured) scientific libraries that are written in C++, and I've 
even seen a couple of decent OS microkernels done in C++. I simply find 
C++ unreadable, which is why I'm such a big fan of SWIG. :)

-- 
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky, FBG, AB, PTA, PGS, MS, MNLP, NST, ACMC(P)
http://borasky-research.blogspot.com/

If God had meant for carrots to be eaten cooked, He would have given rabbits fire.