beamendsltd wrote: >as it is not compilation in the "traditional" sense,
I do take your point here, but AFAIK JIT and dynamic compilation are cleverer than ordinary compilation, because they can optimise branches on the fly depending on circumstances.
Steve
Didn't find your answer? Ask the community — no account required.
S
Steve Taylor
Isn't this the most wonderfully OT thread we have had for ages ?
Steve
R
Richard Brookman
...and Steve Taylor spake unto the tribes of Usenet, saying...
Should be headed SFOTILITOROS
So Far Off Topic It's Lost In The Outer Reaches Of Space.
For mere mortals, anyhow :-)
Pint of EP90, anyone?
S
Steve Taylor
beamendsltd wrote: .
As a largely embedded software writer I am strongly in favour of bondage and discipline languages. I don't see any benefit to lax typing, it encourages sloppy thinking.
Steve
B
beamendsltd
Far more interesting than boring old Landies - well, perhaps not :-)
Richard
B
beamendsltd
I like Delphi (Pascal roots etc...), now that *would* start an argument in a C++ group! Richard
B
beamendsltd
We'll just have to disagree on that, partcularly in the JVM being mis-named!
Definately not true - the beauty of Java it is indeed a program(let) in it's own right, but it depends on JVM being present to work, whereas a C++ program will run on a processor in its own right, having gathered all it's resources at compile time, though it will obviously fail if the OS is not present to handle device drivers etc. A Java program will do nothing at all without the JVM being present, the processor could do nothing with it - it would be like trying to execute a text file as far as the processor is concerned. That's a huge difference.
Ricgard
B
beamendsltd
Hang on a minute! Who said anything about RISC OS? I worked with VMS, PC's, Unix, various embedded OS's for ten years, I have no idea what the above is supposed to be about, but if you are trying to say I have some blinkered view of things then just say so. And make a fool of yourself. I think this discussion is at an end.
You may beleive what you like.
Richard
B
beamendsltd
Definately agreed, but when you need to just knock up a program quickly with not much planning then weak typing is distinct advantage (until it allgoes wrong, of course!). Very strict project management can, however, compensate, e.g. the Manchester Airport project.
If you are talking about embedded, as in ECU's the the overheads of C++ etc are far to big.
Richard
I
Ian Rawlings
Not without its own version of a "virtual machine", in the form of the system library API, I suppose you could make it spin around in a loop with no I/O...
I think we're talking using different language here, and I'm a little tired of it.
I
Ian Rawlings
I think you do have a blinkered view of things, and I'm only too happy for this discussion to end.
S
Steve Taylor
Ian Rawlings wrote: .
Still its a first - language and OS wars in a Landrover group ;-)
Steve
R
Richard Brookman
...and Steve Taylor spake unto the tribes of Usenet, saying...
Windows is situated at SP145835.
That's an OS grid reference.
:-)
Coat...
W
William Tasso
wars? nah, just a little spirited chit-chat about language implementation. didn't see much about o/s issues - thankfully.
In any event - it would appear we are all agreed the web site in question could do with a makeover.
I
Ian Rawlings
Are there any herns in the group? We could see if we can work some gun control in too!
B
beamendsltd
Praise the lord!
Richard
B
beamendsltd
Ture - can we try comparative religion now? (Ducks...)
Richard
S
Steve Taylor
Oi. We said no comparitive religion.
Steve
I
Ian Rawlings
I don't see how we can prophet from that..
B
beamendsltd
I should have seen that comming...... :-)
Richard
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required
Report Content
You are reporting this content to the moderators. They will look at it
ASAP.