That's not the point. The point the parent is making is that yes, languages that include safety features are slower, but you will actually need those safety features in C as well, in the code. So your program will also be slower in C.
There is something backwards about how safety checks are done in C.
First it's up to the programmer to put them in.
Then hopefully the compiler will optimize away the unneeded ones. If the programmer though biffs and forgets then oops. And of course classically we blame the programmer not the system he's been forced to work under.
That seems like a reasonable thing in 1982. Which is 40 years ago.
It would be better if the compiler implemented the checks automagically and removed ones it knows it doesn't need. And bonus, if the programmer puts one in, leave it alone.
Yes, I think we're actually all in agreement here. The common point is that TFA's argument that we need to keep C because it's faster is invalid. The GP's point is that it is not in fact faster because of all the things you need to do to produce code that can actually be deployed in today's world. My point is that even if C were faster (which it actually isn't) that would not matter because C is unsafe even with all the extra stuff that people stick onto it to try to make it safe. So the original claim is really a judgement call that speed matters more than safety, and this is not something about which there is any kind of consensus.
What does slower actually mean? Slower in the face of safety, while computers continue to get faster and or cheaper (depending on how you spend your transistors/cost) is a fools paradise. Don't be baited into their flawed logic.
If your transistor/cost curve has a doubling time of 3 years, 156 weeks. A 5% difference is approximately 11 weeks.
If your transistor/cost curve has a doubling time of 2 years, a 5% difference is approximately 8 weeks.
How fast do we have to get before safety is table stakes? Focusing on raw unsafe speed wouldn't be a normalized metric in any other industry. I'll spend 8-11 weeks of performance gains on correctness.
