Skimmed this and found that a lot of claims are inaccurate and don't have data... Then realized, ugh, it's another Medium post. One particular wrong claim:
> In C#, for example, reference objects and value objects live entirely separate lives. Value objects are always passed by value. You cannot take the the address of a value object and pass that around. No, you need to copy the whole object every time.
In C#, there are normal, C-style pointers. (Although they aren't used very often, mostly when interoperating with C APIs.) Furthermore, you can pass a struct by reference if copying the struct is a problem.
I once wrote some performance critical code where I used structs and past them around by pointers. I ran the code through a profiler, and then refactored to use normal idiomatic non-pointer code. After running through a profiler there was no performance difference.
---
The author of this post really needs to base their claims on actual data. Some well-tuned programs in the languages compared and then compare the performance.
> In C#, for example, reference objects and value objects live entirely separate lives. Value objects are always passed by value. You cannot take the the address of a value object and pass that around. No, you need to copy the whole object every time.
In C#, there are normal, C-style pointers. (Although they aren't used very often, mostly when interoperating with C APIs.) Furthermore, you can pass a struct by reference if copying the struct is a problem.
I once wrote some performance critical code where I used structs and past them around by pointers. I ran the code through a profiler, and then refactored to use normal idiomatic non-pointer code. After running through a profiler there was no performance difference.
---
The author of this post really needs to base their claims on actual data. Some well-tuned programs in the languages compared and then compare the performance.