Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 05:09:12 02/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2004 at 07:00:43, Tord Romstad wrote: >On February 16, 2004 at 15:15:16, Anthony Cozzie wrote: > >>What Bob is saying (and I agree with this 100%) is that what you can do with a >>low level language is by definition a superset of what you can do with a high >>level language (given sufficient time/money/motivation). > >True in theory, but not always in practice, when you have limited time and >resources. And even when the final version of the program is written in a >low-level language, it is often a good idea to implement a prototype in a >high-level language first. > >>Chess engines are usually small enough projects that it is possible to do >>everything in C. Assembly is getting harder nowadays because you must have so >>many different versions: good assembly for P4 is not good assembly for Athlon, >>and of course an x86-64 version is completely different. >> >>But I think that a lot of programs (web browsers, word processors, etc) simply >>don't need to be fast and _should_ be written in a high level language. > >Yes. And even in programs which need to be fast, the performance-critical >code is usually just a small part of the whole program. Writing this small >part in a low-level language should most often be good enough. > >Chess programs are unusual in the sense that the performance-critical parts >of the code is a rather high percentage of the total program size. > >>Sadly it is looking like that language will be C#, rather than ML or Lisp. > >I am not sure precisely why you consider this sad, but if it is future job >opportunities you worry about, I think there is no need to be pessimistic. >There are jobs in ML, Lisp and other non-mainstream languages. Of course >you will not find as many jobs as for C++, Java or C#, but there will also >be fewer applicants for ML and Lisp jobs. I also think it is a fairly safe >bet that the average Lisp or ML job is much more interesting than the >average Java job. You can also expect a higher salary (you are hard to >replace because few people know the language) and more talented and >knowledgable colleagues. > >Tord Actually there is nothing in ML, it is more of a toy language than anything else . I love how you just claimed Lisp programmers are "smarter and more knowledgeable" then C++ programmers :) anthony
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.