Subject:
|
Re: Why Java for Robots (was NXT and bluetooth enabled phones)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Tue, 17 Jan 2006 21:50:22 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
steve <SJBAKER1@nospamAIRMAIL.NET>
|
Viewed:
|
1828 times
|
| |
|
|
Bruce Boyes wrote:
> You seem to be confusing "Java" with "Javascript", they are not at all
> the same thing.
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.
> 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++.
Java is faster where someone has already written suitable libraries.
Because there are things you can't do in raw Java (or which would be
too slow), there tend to be more of those libraries out there than
there are for C++ - but it's nothing inherent in the language - it's
all to do with the support.
It's also worth noting that a huge proportion of Java libraries
are actually written in C++.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
