|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Bring back assembler and 12k machines - that sorts the men from the boys!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam West" <samwest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 6:54 PM
Subject: Re: Advanced Trading Platform using C#.Net
> I see you've completely missed my point. You are comparing a very high
> level scripting language (Easylanguage) with a real programming language
> (C#). Of course the real programming language will be faster. Why - far
> fewer layers of abstraction. With the Easylanguage abstraction we gain
high
> level functionality (Buy, Sell, Plot ...), simplicity and easy of use. We
> give up performance and flexibility.
>
> My point is, if your going to start out clean with a new application, and
> top performance is your goal (which may or may not be the goal here) then
> there are faster alternatives to the Dot net framework languages (C#,
> VB.net, C++.net).
>
> Microsoft calls the code generated by these Dot net languages "Managed"
> code. Managed meaning its managed by and compiles to the Dot net
framework.
> Non Dot net compiled languages (Object Pascal (win32 Delphi), C++, C, VB6
> and PowerBasic (thanks Mike Symth)) generate code that compiles directly
to
> the win32, Microsoft now call this "Native" code.
>
> Its a given, any lower level language than Easylanguage will be faster, I
> just though I would point out to some folks who didn't realize it that C#
> and the other Dot net languages will always be slower, because of the
extra
> abstraction layer of the Dot net framework, that languages that compile
> directly to the win32.
>
> I have Tradestation running an a workstation with a 19" LCD in portrait
> mode. I wrote a little utility app in C# to run with tradestation on that
> workstation and the screen refresh rate on that C# app was horrible. It
> reminded me of a java application. I rewrote that application with Delphi
> (win32 Object Pascal) and the screen updates now pop on the screen.
>
> sam
>
>
> CJ wrote:
> > And you point is what? Pascal is faster than C#? You are kidding me
> > right?
> >
> > There is no need to cry about Pascal and Delhi and Super Pascal, Super
> > Dupper Basic or C++. Last time I checked you couldn't use them in
> > Powerful Power Editor anyways! Last I heard they were making a
> > section in London Pre Historic Museum to display these technological
> > monuments.
> >
> > By the you guys, I am gonna ask ya all a very personal question, don't
> > answer if its too embarrassing, are still using windows 95? And hating
> > Microsoft?
> >
> > We are talking about EL being faster than C#. We are talking about
> > which language will give you the greatest flexibility given the base
> > platform offers the same features and functionality.
> >
> > Who care if C++ is faster or not, you cant code in C++ in Tradestation
> > anyways.
> >
> > And for C#:
> >
> > 1. This is very flexible and very powerful language integrated with
> > your OS.
> >
> > In C# you can implement layers for any application domain you want
> > and its easy to support and extend.
> >
> > 2. You can implement any data structures you want. The only
> > limitation is your imagination and creativity, and no longer you are
> > suffocated by limited capability of EL and you DON'T need to use
> > external DLLS to implement a simple tasks which Pascal or EL where
> > never designed to carryout.
> >
> > 3. If you want something new in EL, that's not supported by Omega
> > what will to do? In C# you can easily and quickly implement your
> > ideas or hire from a pool of millions of developers C# programmers
> > who can help you.
> >
> > The average cost of C# programmer is about $35 per hours and lower if
> > you go offshore! Now compare that to the $175 per hour you have to
> > pay for the snoby EL programmers most of them are not qualified and
> > type with 2 fingers.
> >
> > 4. Speed? Speed of C# faster than EL. PERIOD. I have a conducted lot
> > of experiments in this area - and C# really faster on all stages of
> > processing of data. AS I said who care if C# is little slower than
> > c++, that's irrelevant here. An optimization run in c# takes about
> > 1/5 of the time it takes EL! And no I am not using a genetic
> > optimizer addon of a addon to run along EL which is yet another
> > addon! Add all the addons together in Tradestation and you will know
> > what I mean!!
> >
> > 5. Also you have the entire Microsoft team working for you. As .Net
> > is just starting mature, it will get faster. As I said already .Net
> > 2.0 is about 30% faster than currently implementation.
> >
> > 6. I am bored.
> >
> > 7. Regards,
> >
> > R
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Sam West [mailto:samwest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 12:22 PM
> > To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Advanced Trading Platform using C#.Net
> >
> > I guess someone needs to come to the defense of Pascal and I guess
> > that someone will be me. Delphi uses Object Pascal which is a modern
> > object oriented language just as C++ is an object oriented version of
> > C.
> >
> > Easylanguage is just a very high level scripting language.
> >
> > FWIW, the problem with C# is that it sits on top of an additional
> > abstraction layer - the "Dot net framework". This is conceptually
> > similar to how java sits on top of an additional abstraction layer -
> > the "java virtual machine". When you run on the Windows platform,
> > both of these abstraction layers sit on top of the "win32". Object
> > Pascal, C++, C and VB6
> >
> > sit directly on top of the win32.
> >
> > Anytime you add an additional abstraction layer you get something and
> > you give-up something. With java you gain platform independence.
> > With the Dot net framework you gain language independence. When you
> > write to the Dot net
> >
> > framework you can write in C# or VB.net or C++.net and the resulting
> > intermediate code is virtually identical.
> >
> > What you always give-up with additional abstraction layers is
> > performance. Whether that performance hit is acceptable depends on
> > the application. For typical business applications it's probably
> > hardly noticeable. But you won't see serious first person shooter
> > games written in a dot net language any time soon.
> >
> > sam
> >
> >
> > Ray Gurke wrote:
> >>> [...] Pascal invented by the Flintstones [...]
> >>
> >> ROFLMAO ...Jeez, I remember when Pascal was a modern language. I
> >> must be older than the dirt under Fred's toenails :)
> >>
> >>> funny, but true. <g>
> >>
> >> Ahhh.. but I think Easy Language is more of an obfuscated version of
> >> Turbo Pascal (a legacy from System Writer Plus) - maybe invented by
> >> the Jetsons ..I think George's boy Elroy wrote it. ;-)
>
|