To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.roboticsOpen lugnet.robotics in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Robotics / 25298
25297  |  25299
Subject: 
Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.robotics
Date: 
Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:34:56 GMT
Original-From: 
Bruce Boyes <BBOYES@SYSTRONIX.COMnomorespam>
Viewed: 
1385 times
  
At 11:11 AM 1/17/2006, steve wrote:
Laurent Desnogues wrote:

C++ is not a language for inexperienced programmers - it's for
intelligent, experienced professionals who know what they are
doing and why they are doing it.  C++ programmers have to
know where to put up self-imposed walls of protection and where
to sacrifice that protection for performance.

Java (and it's ilk) certainly protect you and force you into
'good practices' - but they don't give you a way out when you
need it.   Remember that Java was intended to keep the programmer
inside a secure sandbox.  When you visit a web site and Java is
enabled on your browser, the theory is that Java is unable to break
out of the sandbox and destroy your computer - so you can trust
completely unknown applications not to do nasty things.  You couldn't
trust C++ in that way - which is why Microsoft's "Active-X" is such
an incredibly stupid idea.

You seem to be confusing "Java" with "Javascript", they are not at
all the same thing. It's unfortunate that Javascript is named to
suggest that it is somehow similar. Javascript in a browser (it can
only execute within a browser) is constrained to a sandbox; Java the
language on your PC as an application (not in a browser), has no such
constraints, see:
http://www.devx.com/projectcool/Article/20066/0/page/2
for a discussion on this topic.

Some refer to Java as a "high-level high level language" and C/C++ as
a "low-level high level language" and there's a lot of truth to that.
Java abstracts things more (example: javaxcomm for serial I/O), but
at least there are standards (example: C/C++ have no such serial I/O
standards at all). But it can be frustrating when you want to peek
under the covers in Java and you can't, at least with any degree of
ease. But the other side of that coin is that programmer productivity
for appropriate applications is much higher in Java than C/C++.

Regards

Bruce


------- WWW.SYSTRONIX.COM ----------
   Real embedded Java and much more
+1-801-534-1017  Salt Lake City, USA



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
 
(...) No - absolutely not. I program with both and am fully aware of the differences. Java was ALSO designed to stay in the sand-box when initially started from there. (...) Java is faster where someone has already written suitable libraries. (...) (18 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
 
(...) The point about C++ is that you can overload the array indexing mechanism and build a 'class' to implement arrays that does array bounds checking (or implements the "array" as a linked list or stores it on disk or whatever else you can (...) (18 years ago, 17-Jan-06, to lugnet.robotics)

4 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR