Why Java Fail and C++ rise

[firehead.satish]

Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

Disadvantages

1) When a complete java application has been written and it has to be
packaged then entire JRE has to packaged with it. Because a particular
JRE version is used therefore the entire JRE and java application has
to deployed in conjuction.
Also it can be assumed that end-user might be using a Java application
to solve his/her daily problems BUT when the users have a small hard-
drive capacity JAVA FAILS big time.
If you look at all professional Java applications, the companies
deploy their products but they also deploy JRE that the company has
used to develop the application. This would have to a version control
lock-in, which inturn the increase of java products.
Using JAVA it will lead a higher consumption of hard-drive space, more
RAM and more CPU power.
Because of this hardware common-end user will be discourage to use
Java applications.

I must say that if I create an OOP object I should be able to specify
when the destruction of a object should occur.
Pretty much DMD compiler.

Besides pointers C++ rules hand down.
FireHead

[=?UTF-8?B?RXJpayBXaWtzdHLDtm0=?=]

On 2007-09-26 12:37, fi*************@gmail.com wrote:

Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

Disadvantages

1) When a complete java application has been written and it has to be
packaged then entire JRE has to packaged with it. Because a particular
JRE version is used therefore the entire JRE and java application has
to deployed in conjuction.
Also it can be assumed that end-user might be using a Java application
to solve his/her daily problems BUT when the users have a small hard-
drive capacity JAVA FAILS big time.
If you look at all professional Java applications, the companies
deploy their products but they also deploy JRE that the company has
used to develop the application. This would have to a version control
lock-in, which inturn the increase of java products.
Using JAVA it will lead a higher consumption of hard-drive space, more
RAM and more CPU power.
Because of this hardware common-end user will be discourage to use
Java applications.

I must say that if I create an OOP object I should be able to specify
when the destruction of a object should occur.
Pretty much DMD compiler.

Besides pointers C++ rules hand down.

Besides preaching to the choir, do you have any C++ question you want
answered?

--
Erik Wikström

[Bernd Strieder]

Hello,

fi*************@gmail.com wrote:

>
Disadvantages

1) When a complete java application has been written and it has to be
packaged then entire JRE has to packaged with it.

>
I must say that if I create an OOP object I should be able to specify
when the destruction of a object should occur.
Pretty much DMD compiler.

>
Besides pointers C++ rules hand down.

Just enumerating a few parts where common implementations of Java and
C++ have weaknesses or where features of the languages are easily
abused is not enough to conclude anything. Even completing the
respective lists for both languages will not change a lot.

>

FireHead

Nomen est omen.

Bernd Strieder

[Default User]

fi*************@gmail.com wrote:

Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

And we don't need another fight here.


Brian

[Alexander Dong Back Kim]

On Sep 27, 6:42 am, "Default User" <[e-mail]:

[e-mail] wrote:

Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

And we don't need another fight here.

Brian

Hi Brian,

I'm totally agree with you.

I can't see the point. Why are people fighting on the programming
languages? Different people have different tastes! Don't blame
programming languages but your stupidness.

Cheers,

[Stuart Golodetz]

"Alexander Dong Back Kim" <al*******@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@g4g2000hsf.googlegrou ps.com...

On Sep 27, 6:42 am, "Default User" <[e-mail]:

>[e-mail] wrote:

Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

And we don't need another fight here.

Brian

Hi Brian,

I'm totally agree with you.

I can't see the point. Why are people fighting on the programming
languages? Different people have different tastes! Don't blame
programming languages but your stupidness.

Cheers,

Hi,

Agreed on the pointlessness of language wars. An additional point would be
that you should choose the tool to fit the job, rather than picking
languages based on personal taste (though that does play some role). As the
wise sage once said, "Whilst one might choose an axe to cut a fallen tree
into logs because it looks more fun, using a saw often results in a cleaner
solution to the problem. Of course, if one only has an axe, or if one's
expertise leans so far towards the chopping side of things that picking up
the necessary sawing skills in the time available seems unlikely, it can
occasionally make sense to use an axe regardless, although the end result
will (all things being equal) be inferior. In general, wise men should learn
how to use both axes and saws, and more importantly when (and when not) to
use them."

Well, just my 2p anyway :-)
Stu

[Jon Slaughter]

"Stuart Golodetz" <sg*******@dNiOaSl.PpAiMpPeLxE.AcSoEmwrote in message
news:Or******************************@pipex.net...

"Alexander Dong Back Kim" <al*******@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@g4g2000hsf.googlegrou ps.com...

>On Sep 27, 6:42 am, "Default User" <[e-mail]:

>>[e-mail] wrote:
Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

And we don't need another fight here.

Brian

Hi Brian,

I'm totally agree with you.

I can't see the point. Why are people fighting on the programming
languages? Different people have different tastes! Don't blame
programming languages but your stupidness.

Cheers,

Hi,

Agreed on the pointlessness of language wars. An additional point would be
that you should choose the tool to fit the job, rather than picking
languages based on personal taste (though that does play some role). As
the wise sage once said, "Whilst one might choose an axe to cut a fallen
tree into logs because it looks more fun, using a saw often results in a
cleaner solution to the problem. Of course, if one only has an axe, or if
one's expertise leans so far towards the chopping side of things that
picking up the necessary sawing skills in the time available seems
unlikely, it can occasionally make sense to use an axe regardless,
although the end result will (all things being equal) be inferior. In
general, wise men should learn how to use both axes and saws, and more
importantly when (and when not) to use them."

It seems like who ever this "wise" person is never saw a real lumberjack in
action.

[firehead.satish]

Being a C++ forum I was expecting some good detailed comparision
against java.
I am not contented that java has failed in front of my eyes.

And in terms of lumberjacks...

Lets say AXE is C++ and the WOOD SAW is the JAVA.

If you want to cut a lumber jack and you know AXE is powerful enough
to handle all issue then why on earth would you use SAW for?
Thank you all for you quick response.

On Sep 26, 8:37 pm, [e-mail] wrote:

Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

Disadvantages

1) When a complete java application has been written and it has to be
packaged then entire JRE has to packaged with it. Because a particular
JRE version is used therefore the entire JRE and java application has
to deployed in conjuction.
Also it can be assumed that end-user might be using a Java application
to solve his/her daily problems BUT when the users have a small hard-
drive capacity JAVA FAILS big time.
If you look at all professional Java applications, the companies
deploy their products but they also deploy JRE that the company has
used to develop the application. This would have to a version control
lock-in, which inturn the increase of java products.
Using JAVA it will lead a higher consumption of hard-drive space, more
RAM and more CPU power.
Because of this hardware common-end user will be discourage to use
Java applications.

I must say that if I create an OOP object I should be able to specify
when the destruction of a object should occur.
Pretty much DMD compiler.

Besides pointers C++ rules hand down.

FireHead

[=?UTF-8?B?RXJpayBXaWtzdHLDtm0=?=]

On 2007-09-27 05:10, fi*************@gmail.com wrote:

On Sep 26, 8:37 pm, [e-mail] wrote:

>Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

Disadvantages

1) When a complete java application has been written and it has to be
packaged then entire JRE has to packaged with it. Because a particular
JRE version is used therefore the entire JRE and java application has
to deployed in conjuction.
Also it can be assumed that end-user might be using a Java application
to solve his/her daily problems BUT when the users have a small hard-
drive capacity JAVA FAILS big time.
If you look at all professional Java applications, the companies
deploy their products but they also deploy JRE that the company has
used to develop the application. This would have to a version control
lock-in, which inturn the increase of java products.
Using JAVA it will lead a higher consumption of hard-drive space, more
RAM and more CPU power.
Because of this hardware common-end user will be discourage to use
Java applications.

I must say that if I create an OOP object I should be able to specify
when the destruction of a object should occur.
Pretty much DMD compiler.

Besides pointers C++ rules hand down.

Please, do not top post, and do not quote signatures, see the FAQ
section 5.4: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/

Being a C++ forum I was expecting some good detailed comparision
against java.
I am not contented that java has failed in front of my eyes.

If you want a comparison then ask for it.

And in terms of lumberjacks...

Lets say AXE is C++ and the WOOD SAW is the JAVA.

If you want to cut a lumber jack and you know AXE is powerful enough
to handle all issue then why on earth would you use SAW for?

Just because the axe is powerful enough to get the job done does not
mean that it is the best tool, or even a good tool. Assembler is
powerful enough to accomplish any task, yet few people uses it for more
than some small inlined functions.

When choosing a language there are many things to consider, how familiar
the programmers are with it, for which platforms it can produce
executables, what available libraries there are, performance of produced
code, size of produced code, licensing costs for needed software and
tools, etc. I know people who write programs in Matlab, because most of
what they do is matrix operations and all they want is a small GUI to
input data and present the results.

PS. To cut a lumber jack a knife is probably more suitable, using a saw
or axe to kill a person will probably give you a much longer prison
sentence. :-)

--
Erik Wikström

[Stuart Golodetz]

"Jon Slaughter" <Jo***********@Hotmail.comwrote in message
news:x6******************@newssvr11.news.prodigy.n et...

>
"Stuart Golodetz" <sg*******@dNiOaSl.PpAiMpPeLxE.AcSoEmwrote in message
news:Or******************************@pipex.net...

>"Alexander Dong Back Kim" <al*******@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@g4g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com...

>>On Sep 27, 6:42 am, "Default User" <[e-mail]:
[e-mail] wrote:
Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

And we don't need another fight here.

Brian

Hi Brian,

I'm totally agree with you.

I can't see the point. Why are people fighting on the programming
languages? Different people have different tastes! Don't blame
programming languages but your stupidness.

Cheers,

Hi,

Agreed on the pointlessness of language wars. An additional point would
be that you should choose the tool to fit the job, rather than picking
languages based on personal taste (though that does play some role). As
the wise sage once said, "Whilst one might choose an axe to cut a fallen
tree into logs because it looks more fun, using a saw often results in a
cleaner solution to the problem. Of course, if one only has an axe, or if
one's expertise leans so far towards the chopping side of things that
picking up the necessary sawing skills in the time available seems
unlikely, it can occasionally make sense to use an axe regardless,
although the end result will (all things being equal) be inferior. In
general, wise men should learn how to use both axes and saws, and more
importantly when (and when not) to use them."

It seems like who ever this "wise" person is never saw a real lumberjack
in action.

Point taken...I was being rather tongue in cheek (and asking for it a
bit...) :-) I feel appropriately chastised!

[Off-topic]

For what it's worth, my comment was based on a real experience with both at
a chalet in France over the summer - it's possible to cut logs with an axe
by using angled cuts, but for a novice it's a LOT easier with a saw (and the
results are a lot neater). An expert lumberjack might well disagree (and
being neither an expert in using an axe nor in sawing, I wouldn't argue with
him/her). Arguably the right tool for the job is a chainsaw, anyway. The
best lumberjacks will get good results with an axe, but they will always get
beaten on productivity by the best users of chainsaws, because they're more
suited for the job. (Equally, they'll generally beat novice chainsaw users,
who'll probably take a toe off by using something they don't understand
properly...)

Incidentally, just in case there's any misunderstanding, I'm talking about
chopping logs across the grain. Cutting them along the grain (splitting
them) is better done with an axe than a saw. I suspect a chainsaw would do
pretty well too (probably better than an axe), but I don't know for sure and
I've talked enough rot for one week... :-)

[/Off-topic]

Cheers,
Stu

[Stuart Golodetz]

On Sep 26, 8:37 pm, [e-mail] wrote:

>Hello All,

I have seen a lot of forums that are fight over these 2 languages.

Disadvantages

1) When a complete java application has been written and it has to be
packaged then entire JRE has to packaged with it. Because a particular
JRE version is used therefore the entire JRE and java application has
to deployed in conjuction.
Also it can be assumed that end-user might be using a Java application
to solve his/her daily problems BUT when the users have a small hard-
drive capacity JAVA FAILS big time.
If you look at all professional Java applications, the companies
deploy their products but they also deploy JRE that the company has
used to develop the application. This would have to a version control
lock-in, which inturn the increase of java products.
Using JAVA it will lead a higher consumption of hard-drive space, more
RAM and more CPU power.
Because of this hardware common-end user will be discourage to use
Java applications.

I must say that if I create an OOP object I should be able to specify
when the destruction of a object should occur.
Pretty much DMD compiler.

Besides pointers C++ rules hand down.

FireHead

<fi*************@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11*********************@22g2000hsm.googlegrou ps.com...

>
Being a C++ forum I was expecting some good detailed comparision
against java.
I am not contented that java has failed in front of my eyes.

And in terms of lumberjacks...

Lets say AXE is C++ and the WOOD SAW is the JAVA.

If you want to cut a lumber jack and you know AXE is powerful enough
to handle all issue then why on earth would you use SAW for?
Thank you all for you quick response.

Nothing is powerful enough to handle all issues. An axe can't cure cancer,
for instance (regrettably). I have no axe to grind (no pun intended) between
C++ and Java, I use them both on a regular basis, but I try to use them
appropriately if I can. My point would be that neither is strictly better
than the other. If C++ was absolutely better than Java, or Java was
absolutely better than C++, of course everyone would (probably should, at
any rate) use the better of the two. The fact is that both have their
advantages and disadvantages, which is why people debate which one is
"better". The answer is that neither is when taken out of context, but that
one or the other will often be preferable for a given project (sometimes
there may be little to choose).

Regards,
Stu

[Philip Potter]

Stuart Golodetz wrote:

[Off-topic]
Incidentally, just in case there's any misunderstanding, I'm talking about
chopping logs across the grain. Cutting them along the grain (splitting
them) is better done with an axe than a saw. I suspect a chainsaw would do
pretty well too (probably better than an axe), but I don't know for sure and
I've talked enough rot for one week... :-)

How would a chainsaw /split/ wood?

[/Off-topic]

--
Philip Potter pgp <atdoc.ic.ac.uk

[Victor Bazarov]

Philip Potter wrote:

Stuart Golodetz wrote:

>[Off-topic]
Incidentally, just in case there's any misunderstanding, I'm talking
about chopping logs across the grain. Cutting them along the grain
(splitting them) is better done with an axe than a saw. I suspect a
chainsaw would do pretty well too (probably better than an axe), but
I don't know for sure and I've talked enough rot for one week... :-)

How would a chainsaw /split/ wood?

It wouldn't split. It might cut it with the grain ("rip") instead of
across the grain, the usual method, which would probably be close to
splitting. The saying I think applicable here is, "when all you have
is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".

>

>[/Off-topic]

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask