| ▲ | pjmlp 21 hours ago |
| I would vote for Delphi/FreePascal, but share the sentiment. |
|
| ▲ | CWuestefeld 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I only had limited exposure to Delphi, but from what I experienced, it's big thumbs-up. But if you liked that, consider that C# was in many ways a spiritual successor to Delphi, and MS still supports native GUI development with it. |
| |
| ▲ | pjmlp 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | Except on the AOT experience and low level programming, which only started to be taken seriously during the last five years. |
|
|
| ▲ | NooneAtAll3 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Lua |
| |
| ▲ | pjmlp 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | Performance? | | |
| ▲ | Etheryte 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If there was sufficient interest in it, most performance issues could be solved. Look at Python or Javascript, big companies have financial interest in it so they've poured an insane amount of capital into making them faster. | | |
| ▲ | Rochus 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Do you think that "most performance issues" in Python are solved? | |
| ▲ | vips7L 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Isn’t python still the slowest mainstream language? | | |
| ▲ | Etheryte 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Being slower than other mainstream languages isn't really a problem in and of itself if it's fast enough to get the job done. Looking at all the ML and LLM work that's done in Python, I would say it is fast enough to get things done. | | |
| ▲ | NetMageSCW 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | As pointed out already, most of that uses C code or GPU code to do the work and not slow Python code. |
| |
| ▲ | chungy 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | No. Ruby exists. | | |
| ▲ | dragonwriter 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ruby is now faster than Python, last I saw a comparison, though it used to be the other way around. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | kh_hk 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | LuaJIT can be extremely fast | | |
|
|
