#Bluegriffon php generator
#Bluegriffon php software
#Bluegriffon php code
#Bluegriffon php professional

We wouldn't have had engineers taking home TC worth 500-600k and then complaining that Python or Ruby are not what the world needs. We wouldn't have had (what basically are) web companies worth tens, if not hundreds of billions of dollars, if the web had still meant relying on Struts or on whatever it is Microsoft was putting forward as a web framework in the mid-2000s. What I'm trying to say is that those languages that everyone is quick to judge right now have given us 10, maybe 15 years of extra 'life', a period when most of us have 'made' our careers and, well, most of our money (those who have managed to make that money, that is). True, the web has become sort of an oligopoly right now, but at least that was not caused by the programming languages and web frameworks that power it. I'm talking about most of the 2000s decade. It was the 'bad' untyped languages like PHP, Python and Ruby (Perl was too complicated for us, mere mortals) that saved the web from becoming a Microsoft monopoly, or, more likely, an oligopoly between the same MS, probably Sun, probably IBM or some such.

#Bluegriffon php generator

But I'm never gonna hold some weekend-project static site generator in Ruby to the same standard as macOS.

#Bluegriffon php code

I think everyone would benefit from playing with OpenRTOS, or writing some code that deals with video/audio where there are hard deadlines on latency.

#Bluegriffon php software

Medical apparatus(es?) and guidance software on autonomous vehicles are examples of where latency is a life-or-death situation.

#Bluegriffon php professional

I've seen my fair share of programmers (including myself) refuse to ship to a project because the pursuit of some 'undesirable' latency and not finish more important features.ДЇor tasks like video streaming, Automation software (CI pipelines to robotics), video games, professional tools for content creation (DAWs, video editing, Blender, etc.) performance is the feature, but then your product is helping them get the bills paid faster. I think you can paint the problem in broad strokes from either side of the 'how important is performance?' argument.ДЇrom a 'get the bills paid' point-of-view, any good project manager also has to know when to tell an engineer to focus on getting the product shipped instead of chasing that next 5% in throughput/latency reduction/overhead. Quite often, new products become possible when a basic task like rendering HTML goes from taking 10 seconds to 10ms. I agree to the extent that people fail to realize how they could be missing out opportunities to innovate or corner a market when they leave performance on the table. If you don't then you should use the one you know and come back later if you need to.

If you know both approaches then it's fine, and good, to pick the faster one. If you have a working solution and you're spending time trying to make it faster without knowing it's too slow then you're trying to optimize at the wrong time. it's the 'at the wrong times' bit that's actually the most important part. In your example clearly if there are two approaches and one is 20* faster than the other it's optimization in the right place.Д«ut. вЂњThe real problem is that programmers have spent far too much time worrying about efficiency in the wrong places and at the wrong times premature optimization is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming.вЂќ Not doing simple mistakes that kill performance for no benefit or choosing option B over A where both take equal effort but B is 20x times more performant should be common sense.