But you used a interpreter (for C++) with some expectation it would be faster than a language that is itself interpreted? I mean, I guess you could assume that the stronger typing of C++ would provide an advantage over Python...
But if you hear "interpreted", you should assume 10x slowdown at minimum, unless there has been human-centuries invested in performance improvement like the JVM.
RE: "nothing in the original message about expecting faster that interpreted code" He literally said "it's not any faster than Python" which is an interepreted language. He was expecting interpreted C++ to be substantially/perciptibly faster than Python ... an interpreted language. In case you didn't know a "scripting" language is 99% of the time interpreted.
Python is an interpreted language.
Yes, dynamic recompiling, JIT-ing, etc etc.
But you used a interpreter (for C++) with some expectation it would be faster than a language that is itself interpreted? I mean, I guess you could assume that the stronger typing of C++ would provide an advantage over Python...
But if you hear "interpreted", you should assume 10x slowdown at minimum, unless there has been human-centuries invested in performance improvement like the JVM.
RE: "nothing in the original message about expecting faster that interpreted code" He literally said "it's not any faster than Python" which is an interepreted language. He was expecting interpreted C++ to be substantially/perciptibly faster than Python ... an interpreted language. In case you didn't know a "scripting" language is 99% of the time interpreted.