>>63730063>The "20x faster" you talk about is only saving >1 second in the runtime
It was a small application, I agree.
Maybe it is less for a larger application.>Which proves my theory that C/C++ programmers use C/C++ because they can't write efficient algorithms.
Don't know where you get that from.
This was a language comparison, not the skills of the programmers comparison.
I personally think the ability to write efficient code means there will be people who write efficient code.>In my computer libphobos compiles very fast.
I didn't look into why c++ was slow to compile, I don't think compile time is that important.>D is way more productive than C++ in practice
Why?> any language without stupid header file and C pre processor is more productive
Header files are a good thing, I don't care about what you think.
C preprocessor replacements should not be needed, I agree, but it only hurts compile time.