ohjelmoijat.com

Feature Explanations

• Manual Memory Management: The language requires developers to allocate and deallocate memory manually, giving fine‐grained control over system resources but increasing complexity.
• Garbage Collection: The language includes automatic memory management, freeing developers from handling memory directly but potentially adding runtime overhead. For example, while Swift uses Automatic Reference Counting (ARC) rather than a tracing garbage collector, it is still classified as having garbage collection.
• Borrow Checker: A feature in Rust that enforces strict ownership and borrowing rules at compile time to prevent data races. This feature is unique to Rust.
• Built-in Concurrency: The language provides native support for concurrency (e.g. goroutines in Go, async/await in C# or Swift 5.5+). Note that while C++ includes concurrency support via the standard library (e.g. the <thread> header), these are library features rather than core language constructs. Additionally, Zig’s concurrency model (including its async/await support) is still evolving and may be re-evaluated in future comparisons.
• Cross-Compilation Support: This refers to the ability to compile code for different operating systems and architectures from a single development machine without additional toolchains. In languages like Lua, Perl, Python, PHP, and JavaScript, the term implies that the code (or bytecode) can run on different platforms via interpreters or virtual machines. In contrast, for C the language itself does not include cross-compilation support—this depends entirely on the external toolchain. (Keep in mind that these ratings are subject to the capabilities of available toolchains.)
• Runtime Overhead: The performance cost introduced by the language’s runtime features, such as garbage collection, safety checks, or virtual machines. Although C++ is often described by the “zero‐overhead” principle, using certain abstractions (e.g. virtual functions or heavy template metaprogramming) can introduce overhead. This rating is context-dependent and may vary with coding style and optimization.
• C Interoperability: The ability to directly interface with C libraries and functions. Some languages, such as Zig, Rust, and Swift, offer strong native interoperability. Others, like Go (via cgo) or C# (via P/Invoke), require additional mechanisms, while Lua—despite providing a C API for extension—does not offer first‐class interoperability from within the language itself.
• Compile-Time Execution: This describes a language’s ability to execute code at compile time, enabling optimizations and metaprogramming. Although C++ supports compile-time computation through constexpr functions and template metaprogramming, these features are less central and explicit compared to languages like Zig, and thus C++ is rated "no" in this comparison.
• Strong Type System: Ensures strict type safety, reducing runtime errors by enforcing type rules at compile time. The ratings "yes" and "weak" are simplified, subjective assessments of how rigorously a language enforces its type rules. For example, even dynamically typed languages such as Python or JavaScript are sometimes considered "strong" because they avoid dangerous implicit conversions, though they differ from statically typed languages.
• Package Manager: A built-in system for managing dependencies, libraries, and modules that simplifies development workflows. Many languages include an official package manager (like Cargo for Rust or npm for JavaScript). For C++, the "yes" rating refers to widely used third-party solutions (e.g. vcpkg, Conan, or Hunter), though there is no official, integrated package manager.
• Ease of Learning: This is a subjective measure based on syntax complexity, required prior knowledge, and available learning resources. Simpler languages (e.g. Go or Python) are rated as easy, whereas languages with more complex features (e.g. Rust or C++) are rated as hard.
• Ideal for Systems Programming: Suitable for writing low-level software like operating systems, drivers, and embedded systems where performance and resource control are critical.
• Ideal for Web Programming: Well-suited for developing web applications, APIs, and server-side services. In some cases (e.g. Swift), support is noted as limited if the ecosystem is not as mature for web development.
• Ideal for Game Development: Effective for writing game engines, game logic, or scripting in gaming environments. The rating reflects both the performance characteristics of the language and its ecosystem (for instance, C# is popular via Unity, and Lua is widely used for scripting).
• Note: All ratings and classifications are inherently subjective and based on common perceptions. They may vary with new language versions, evolving ecosystems, or different use-case requirements.