gossamer axe wrote:
I presume you mean "faster than C code". Of course, there was a time
where the statement was "there isn't one thing a C project can do faster
than an assembly project". Both statements are incorrect for some pretty
important things like "get done" or "fix bugs". Even outside of the
human factors side of things, there are other issues to consider. A nice
A few newbie questions here. I thought that the lower level the code,
the faster it runs. So C runs faster than VB but Assembly runs faster
than C. I do realize it's also the talent of the programmer.
The whole "lower level" and "higher level" ideas are generalizations.
It's a good rule of thumb, but reality turns out to be more complicated.
That being said, I was pointing out that the human side of things can be
faster with higher level languages.
What is Java considered? And is C a middle or low level programming language?
Yeah, see this is where those labels get you all messed up. ;-) In
general, Java is a higher level language than C, and C is generally
considered a low level programming language.
The primary reason for this in my experience has been the poor support
for Java on Linux. What has been common, particularly in the past, has
been "We would like this to run on Unix, what's the best route? Port the
Win32 code base to Java!".
What do you mean by poor support on Linux?
Try using Java on OS X. Then you'll understand.
--Chris
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
