Are you trolling? I Honestly don't know where to start with that post.
> You would, if you were scrupulous, compile your C program with a C++ compiler to prove absolutely that C cannot be faster than C++
If my program compiles, which is a big if because c is not a subset of c++, all it would demonstrate is which compiler is better. A c program being compiled with a c++ compiler doesn't gain any type information, it can't make any assumptions that the C compiler couldn't.
> before going on to make the C++ version faster, using features that do not exist in C.
Which features? It's certainly not going to get faster by throwing in OO abstractions and virtual methods.
> Your benchmarks demonstrate only that it is possible to write slow code in any language, even a fast one.
Then show me some better ones, so far I've provided more examples supporting your point than you have.
> You would, if you were scrupulous, compile your C program with a C++ compiler to prove absolutely that C cannot be faster than C++
If my program compiles, which is a big if because c is not a subset of c++, all it would demonstrate is which compiler is better. A c program being compiled with a c++ compiler doesn't gain any type information, it can't make any assumptions that the C compiler couldn't.
> before going on to make the C++ version faster, using features that do not exist in C.
Which features? It's certainly not going to get faster by throwing in OO abstractions and virtual methods.
> Your benchmarks demonstrate only that it is possible to write slow code in any language, even a fast one.
Then show me some better ones, so far I've provided more examples supporting your point than you have.