RE: Java's poor performance? Not really - pick the right tool for the job!

I can't resist jumping in any longer!  Re: "Agree'd, except In my world I
would reverse the statement and say that sometimes C is not the best answer,
a little scripting and a little Java make more sense in a lot of
situations".

The siutation, that best comes to my mind (what's left of it...), is that
Java's facility for quickly putting together some WORKING code for a
"net-centric" application.  It does not take pages and pages of source code
to get the job done.  Re-inventing such stuff in "native code", these days
would just be way beyond proposing, and I would expect upper management
types (if they truly understood the implications!), would take you out back,
and have you shot...

Other detrimental facets to 'C' (and derivates), when doing "net-centric"
applications; Why would I want to pay re-current licensing fees (and/or NRE)
for an IP Stack, if I had to content with distribution in the 100s (or even
10,000s).  I would have to charge an exorbitant amount of $$$ to recoup my
development cost, don't you think!?!

I am not even sure, that I could find a rock solid IP Stack written in 'C'
(and truly GOOD, RESPONSIVE support)...

Just IMHO - Kelly Smith

-----Original Message-----
From: tini-admin-6tN4nzCoH/[email protected] [mailto:tini-admin-6tN4nzCoH/[email protected]]On Behalf Of
NZG
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 7:34 AM
To: Bruce Boyes; tini-6tN4nzCoH/[email protected]
Subject: Re: [TINI]Java's poor performance? Not really - pick the right
tool for the job!


> I'm not starting a language war either, but the "standard I/O library" for
> C is something like this:
> http://ou800doc.caldera.com/SDK_sysprog/_Standard_IO_Library.html
> It's file I/O, not the I/O I was meaning, and does not include _any_
serial
> or parallel I/O, TCP/IP, etc. That was my point. All the most common
> external device I/O is *completely* absent from C. And every C vendor
takes
> a little different approach to adding their own. I've written code in more
> different serial I/O C libraries than I care to remember, and most of them
> I paid big $$$ for. Back in the day a C serial library cost $250-$500 -
> remember Greenleaf and LifeBoat? TurboPower Async Pro? Etc.

I agree different OS's have different system calls to access the IO.
That's why you should always use Linux or linux derivatives for
everything :-) .


> This is a big win for Java: How secure is "Joe's TCP/IP Stack for C"? I'd
> bet my application on Java's security model any day over Microsoft or
> Rabbit or ______.

Now you know that is misleading. Maybe Joe's TCP/IP stack isn't secure but
I'll bet you Linux's is waaaay more secure than Java.


> This is also a big win for OpenSource - a lot of critical eyes looking at
> an open standard tends to produce a much more robust product than some
> proprietary by an handful of people behind closed doors.
>
> And really the benefit of Java is reliability and programmer efficiency.
> There, it's far more efficient than C, as most users who've done both will
> attest.

I'm sure not attesting. I have to write device drivers for linux and
embedded
devices on almost a daily basis, and when it gets low down and dirty java is
nowhere to be seen.

> Java isn't the answer for everything. We still use assy code and C here,
> where it makes the best fit. Sometimes Delphi (basically Java in a
> different wrapper), Python, etc are better.
Agree'd, except In my world I would reverse the statement and say that
sometimes C is not the best answer, a little scripting and a little Java
make
more sense in a lot of situations.


NZG.



_______________________________________________
TINI mailing list
TINI-6tN4nzCoH/[email protected]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, edit your profile, or see list archives:
http://lists.dalsemi.com/mailman/listinfo/tini


_______________________________________________
TINI mailing list
TINI-6tN4nzCoH/[email protected]
To UNSUBSCRIBE, edit your profile, or see list archives:
http://lists.dalsemi.com/mailman/listinfo/tini