Inherent code performance advantages of D over C?

[Paulo Pinto]

On Thursday, 12 December 2013 at 11:42:12 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On 12 December 2013 21:16, Dicebot <public at dicebot.lv> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, 12 December 2013 at 09:01:17 UTC, Paulo Pinto 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Currently I always advocate that C and C++ development should
>>> always be done with warnings as errors enabled, coupled with
>>> static analyzers at very least during CI builds, breaking 
>>> them if
>>> anything is found.
>>>
>>
>> I literally can't imagine any large C project surviving any 
>> long
>> without mandatory doing all listed stuff. It gets to state of
>> unmaintainable insanity so fast.
>>
>
> I feel quite the opposite, I would say that about C++ 
> personally.
>
> I've built a C codebase from the ground over the course of a 
> decade with
> ~25 programmers.
> It takes discipline, and a certainly sense of simplicity in 
> your solutions.
> I personally advocate C over C++ for this very reason, it 
> emphasises
> simplicity in your solutions. It's impossible to get carried 
> away and
> create the sort of unmaintainable bullshit that C++ leads to.
> I like C, I just find it verbose, and prone to boiler plate, 
> which has a
> tendency to waste programmers time... and what is more valuable 
> than a
> programmers time?
>

I favor C++ over C, thanks to the safer constructs it offers me
with a type safety closer to the Pascal family of languages, that
C will never be able to offer.

However I tend to code very seldom in C or C++ nowadays, besides
hobby projects, as the enterprise world nowadays is all about GC
enabled languages, with a little C++ for performance hotspots.

In any case, given my enterprise experience with subcontractors,
I think it is very hard to find good developers that are able to
write error free C or C++ code without lots of enforced
guidelines to guide them screaming along the way.

--
Paulo