[LAU] OT: C or C++?
rm at mh-freiburg.de
Thu Oct 14 20:52:48 UTC 2010
On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:22:52 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Bernardo Barros wrote:
> > I never got the point of Java. It has terrible performance and is much
more complicated then Python.
> > If you want performance go to C/C++, if you want produtivicty go Python.
So why Java?
And is this bold statement based on any remotely real fact or just restating
some blunder you overheard
on the internet? Sorry, I'm sick of hearing the same old claims over and over.
A decent moder JVM with
JIT has more than enogh performance (definitely comparable to python or ruby).
But, more important,
performance hardly ever is a problem nowadays. Even with my graphics-heavy
desktop my system has a load
average 0f 0.03 % - meaning it's mainly running idle ..
> I always wondered about this question too. I guess it is because it
> gives the flavor of C++ to the lazy programmer who doesn't want to
> learn a totally new syntax.
Culture - lot's of (good) frameworks for enterprise computing with good
aproach to programming, thousands of reasons _not_ relevant outside the
But that's where most of programmings lives. So, iff you educate for this
market, you better do it
in Java. I _never_ encountered a company doing in-house development in C++.
> Also Java code is slightly more portable
> than C/C++.
I's not the code that's portable, it's the binaries. Try to use a library
_compiled_ with C++ compiler A
with a program compiled with compiler B on the same box! You can sell Java
class files and run them on
anything from Windows, Mac, Linux to TueUinx, Solaris (rip) and AS400 mainframes.
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
R. Mattes -- Systemeinheitsstreichler
Hochschule fuer Musik Freiburg
rm at inm.mh-freiburg.de
More information about the Linux-audio-user