在听StackOverflow播客的时候,经常有人说“真正的程序员”是用C语言编写的,而C语言的速度要快得多,因为它“接近机器”。把前面的断言留到另一篇文章,C有什么特别之处,使它比其他语言更快?或者换句话说:什么能阻止其他语言编译成二进制代码,使其运行速度与C语言一样快?
当前回答
1)正如其他人所说,C为你做的更少。没有初始化变量,没有数组边界检查,没有内存管理等。其他语言中的这些特性会消耗C语言不需要的内存和CPU周期。
2) Answers saying that C is less abstracted and therefore faster are only half correct I think. Technically speaking, if you had a "sufficiently advanced compiler" for language X, then language X could approach or equal the speed of C. The difference with C is that since it maps so obviously (if you've taken an architecture course) and directly to assembly language that even a naive compiler can do a decent job. For something like Python, you need a very advanced compiler to predict the probable types of objects and generate machine code on the fly -- C's semantics are simple enough that a simple compiler can do well.
其他回答
这都是时间和努力的问题。
给予无限的时间和努力:
汇编程序比用C语言编写的程序要快。 C程序将比用c++编写的程序更快。
固定的:给定一定的时间和努力:
c++程序比用C编写的程序要快。 C语言的程序比用汇编语言编写的程序要快。
为什么?因为你做的抽象越多,你就可以花更多的时间来优化真正重要的代码关键部分。这里的几个假设是,一个开发人员对这三种语言都有同样的能力,你不关心二进制大小、内存使用情况等。
每种抽象都有其成本效益,但应该使代码更容易、更快地编写。
撇开诸如热点优化、预编译元算法和各种形式的并行等高级优化技术不提,语言的基本速度与支持通常在内部循环中指定的操作所需的隐含的幕后复杂性密切相关。
也许最明显的方法是对间接内存引用进行有效性检查——比如检查指针是否为空,检查索引是否符合数组边界。大多数高级语言隐式地执行这些检查,但C不这样做。然而,这并不一定是这些其他语言的基本限制——一个足够聪明的编译器可能能够通过某种形式的循环不变代码运动,从算法的内部循环中删除这些检查。
C语言(在类似程度上与c++密切相关)更基本的优势是严重依赖基于堆栈的内存分配,这本质上是快速的分配、回收和访问。在C(和c++)中,主调用堆栈可用于分配原语、数组和聚合(结构/类)。
虽然C语言确实提供了动态分配任意大小和生命周期的内存的能力(使用所谓的“堆”),但默认情况下是避免这样做的(而是使用堆栈)。
诱人的是,有时可以在其他编程语言的运行时环境中复制C内存分配策略。asm.js已经证明了这一点,它允许用C或c++编写的代码被翻译成JavaScript的子集,并以接近本机的速度安全地运行在web浏览器环境中。
As somewhat of an aside, another area where C and C++ outshine most other languages for speed is the ability to seamlessly integrate with native machine instruction sets. A notable example of this is the (compiler and platform dependent) availability of SIMD intrinsics which support the construction of custom algorithms that take advantage of the now nearly ubiquitous parallel processing hardware -- while still utilizing the data allocation abstractions provided by the language (lower-level register allocation is managed by the compiler).
这实际上是一个长期存在的谎言。虽然C程序确实经常更快,但情况并非总是如此,特别是当C程序员不太擅长它的时候。
人们往往会忘记的一个明显的漏洞是,当程序必须为某种IO阻塞时,比如任何GUI程序中的用户输入。在这些情况下,使用什么语言并不重要,因为您受到数据传入速度的限制,而不是处理数据的速度。在这种情况下,不管你使用的是C、Java、c#甚至Perl;你不能比数据进入的速度更快。
The other major thing is that using garbage collection and not using proper pointers allows the virtual machine to make a number of optimizations not available in other languages. For instance, the JVM is capable of moving objects around on the heap to defragment it. This makes future allocations much faster since the next index can simply be used rather than looking it up in a table. Modern JVMs also don't have to actually deallocate memory; instead, they just move the live objects around when they GC and the spent memory from the dead objects is recovered essentially for free.
This also brings up an interesting point about C and even more so in C++. There is something of a design philosophy of "If you don't need it, you don't pay for it." The problem is that if you do want it, you end up paying through the nose for it. For instance, the vtable implementation in Java tends to be a lot better than C++ implementations, so virtual function calls are a lot faster. On the other hand, you have no choice but to use virtual functions in Java and they still cost something, but in programs that use a lot of virtual functions, the reduced cost adds up.
我认为没有人提到这样一个事实,即在C编译器上投入的精力比任何其他编译器都要多,也许Java是例外。
由于前面提到的许多原因,C是非常可优化的——几乎比任何其他语言都要多。因此,如果在其他语言编译器上投入同样的精力,C可能仍然会名列前茅。
I think there is at least one candidate language that with effort could be optimized better than C and thus we could see implementations that produce faster binaries. I'm thinking of digital mars D because the creator took care to build a language that could potentially be better optimized than C. There may be other languages that have this possibility. However I cannot imagine that any language will have compilers more than just a few percent faster than the best C compilers. I would love to be wrong.
我认为真正的“唾手可得的果实”将是那些被设计为易于人类优化的语言。一个熟练的程序员可以让任何语言运行得更快——但有时你不得不做一些荒谬的事情或使用不自然的结构来实现这一点。尽管这总是需要付出努力,但一种好的语言应该产生相对快速的代码,而不必纠结于程序究竟是如何编写的。
It's also important (at least to me) that the worst case code tends to be fast. There are numerous "proofs" on the web that Java is as fast or faster than C, but that is based on cherry picking examples. I'm not big fan of C, but I know that ANYTHING I write in C is going to run well. With Java it will "probably" run within 15% of the speed, usually within 25% but in some cases it can be far worse. Any cases where it's just as fast or within a couple of percent are usually due to most of the time being spent in the library code which is heavily optimized C anyway.
这不是语言的问题,而是工具和库的问题。C语言可用的库和编译器比新语言要老得多。你可能认为这会让它们变慢,但事实恰恰相反。
这些库是在处理能力和内存非常重要的时候编写的。它们必须写得非常高效,才能发挥作用。C编译器的开发人员也花了很长时间为不同的处理器进行各种巧妙的优化。C语言的成熟和广泛采用使得它比同时期的其他语言具有显著的优势。它还使C语言在速度上比那些不像C语言那样强调原始性能的新工具更有优势。