令人惊讶的是，“C/ c++必须比Java快，因为Java是解释性的”的神话仍然活跃。有几年前的文章，也有最近的文章，用概念或测量来解释为什么这种情况并不总是如此。

当前的虚拟机实现(顺便说一下，不仅仅是JVM)可以利用程序执行期间收集的信息来动态地优化代码，使用各种技术:

将频繁的方法呈现给机器代码， 内联小方法， 锁紧调整

以及各种其他调整，这些调整是基于了解代码实际在做什么，以及它运行的环境的实际特征。

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。

在过去，只有两种类型的语言:编译型和解释型。

编译语言利用“编译器”读取语言语法并将其转换为相同的汇编语言代码，这可以直接在CPU上进行。解释型语言使用了几种不同的方案，但从本质上讲，语言语法被转换成一种中间形式，然后在“解释器”(用于执行代码的环境)中运行。

因此，在某种意义上，在代码和机器之间存在另一个“层”——解释器。而且，在计算机中，越多就意味着使用更多的资源。翻译速度较慢，因为他们必须执行更多的操作。

More recently, we've seen more hybrid languages like Java, that employ both a compiler and an interpreter to make them work. It's complicated, but a JVM is faster, more sophisticated and way more optimized than the old interpreters, so it stands a much better change of performing (over time) closer to just straight compiled code. Of course, the newer compilers also have more fancy optimizing tricks so they tend to generate way better code than they used to as well. But most optimizations, most often (although not always) make some type of trade-off such that they are not always faster in all circumstances. Like everything else, nothing comes for free, so the optimizers must get their boast from somewhere (although often times it using compile-time CPU to save runtime CPU).

Getting back to C, it is a simple language, that can be compiled into fairly optimized assembly and then run directly on the target machine. In C, if you increment an integer, it's more than likely that it is only one assembler step in the CPU, in Java however, it could end up being a lot more than that (and could include a bit of garbage collection as well :-) C offers you an abstraction that is way closer to the machine (assembler is the closest), but you end up having to do way more work to get it going and it is not as protected, easy to use or error friendly. Most other languages give you a higher abstraction and take care of more of the underlying details for you, but in exchange for their advanced functionality they require more resources to run. As you generalize some solutions, you have to handle a broader range of computing, which often requires more resources.

保罗。

我知道很多人都说过这句话，但是:

C更快，因为它(为你)做的更少。

里面有很多问题——大部分是我没有资格回答的问题。但对于最后一个:

有什么能阻止其他语言编译成运行速度和C一样快的二进制呢?

一句话，抽象。

C语言只比机器语言高出一到两个抽象层次。Java和. net语言距离汇编程序至少有3个抽象级别。Python和Ruby我不太确定。

通常，程序员的玩具越多(复杂的数据类型等)，你离机器语言的距离就越远，需要做的翻译就越多。

我在这里和那里都偏离了，但这是基本的要点。

更新-------这篇文章有一些很好的评论，有更多的细节。