<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx</link><description>Raymond Chen (aka "fixed more Windows bugs than you've had hot dinners") and Rico Mariani (aka "Mr .NET Performance") have been running a great series of articles where they write and then optimize the same application in two different languages: native</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx#420641</link><pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2005 02:56:23 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:420641</guid><dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator><description>I must say the way raymond uses C++ strikes me as odd.. more like C with some stuff.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;A struct of wstrings in a vector was too slow; so instead he jumped to storing wchar arrays I believe; why? He could've just made the struct a pointer in the first place. Or the wstrings pointers for that matter.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;He also didnt reserve a decent sized vector up front, nor did he think to use a boost memory pool for the wstrings or similar approaches; He choose to go lowlevel, even though theres vastly superior options available.</description></item><item><title>re: Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx#420664</link><pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2005 04:49:39 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:420664</guid><dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator><description>Say you want to e-mail such a program to a person who you know will run it on a plain Win98 system.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What size of stuff do you have to send to run the C# version, and what size of stuff do you have to send to run the C++ version?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That's why the C++ version is &amp;quot;worth it&amp;quot; in a lot of circumstances.</description></item><item><title>re: Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx#420745</link><pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2005 17:16:42 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:420745</guid><dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator><description>How much is it worth to build applications for systems that are nearly 8 years old?</description></item><item><title>re: Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx#420757</link><pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2005 21:30:40 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:420757</guid><dc:creator>SwitchBL8</dc:creator><description>@Michael: Win98? Tell me your not developing new stuff for Win98? What good does that do the world?</description></item><item><title>re: Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx#421065</link><pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2005 18:57:50 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:421065</guid><dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator><description>Win98 was just one example - if you don't like Win98, then how about if the person is running a fully up-to-date Windows XP SP2 installation that was updated to SP2 over the Internet?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;They might not have the .NET runtime on it, so if you want to send them this little program you wrote, you also have to e-mail them the entire .NET runtime as well.</description></item><item><title>re: Optimizing managed C# vs. native C++ code</title><link>http://blogs.msdn.com/jonathanh/archive/2005/05/20/optimizing-managed-c-vs-native-c-code.aspx#422003</link><pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2005 07:52:35 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:422003</guid><dc:creator>jonathanh</dc:creator><description>Emailing the .NET runtime around is crazy - but thankfully you don't have to do that. Use a bootstrapper in the application installer instead (e.g. &lt;a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.gotdotnet.com/workspaces/workspace.aspx?id=2f8f0a23-f529-4158-8e0a-d187d16f41f1"&gt;http://www.gotdotnet.com/workspaces/workspace.aspx?id=2f8f0a23-f529-4158-8e0a-d187d16f41f1&lt;/a&gt;).</description></item></channel></rss>