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
Isn't this the most wonderfully OT thread we have had for ages ?
Steve
...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?
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
Far more interesting than boring old Landies - well, perhaps not :-)
Richard
I like Delphi (Pascal roots etc...), now that *would* start an argument in a C++ group! Richard
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
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
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
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 think you do have a blinkered view of things, and I'm only too happy for this discussion to end.
Ian Rawlings wrote: .
Still its a first - language and OS wars in a Landrover group ;-)
Steve
...and Steve Taylor spake unto the tribes of Usenet, saying...
Windows is situated at SP145835.
That's an OS grid reference.
:-)
Coat...
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.
Are there any herns in the group? We could see if we can work some gun control in too!
Praise the lord!
Richard
Ture - can we try comparative religion now? (Ducks...)
Richard
Oi. We said no comparitive religion.
Steve
I don't see how we can prophet from that..
I should have seen that comming...... :-)
Richard
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.