Various Topics on C++

..in.. ..usba..

> So there are something that may be do in C++ and not in Java?

writing an OS ( Kernel ) ?

..r.. ..rinki.. ..ff.. .. ..e ..¬ƒceâ€..

Rainer Hausbach wrote:

>> So there are something that may be do in C++ and not in Java?
>
> writing an OS ( Kernel ) ?

The "Church Thesis" or "Turing-machine-computable" or ...
.... means anything to you?

- Dario

..ct.. ..zar..

Jorge Rivera wrote:
> [...]
> How many of you guys actually work on projects in which performance is
> critical? (Something written in Java is unacceptable)

In every application (unless it's a really simple one) there are critical
parts where performance is paramount. Whether performance takes front
seat in that case is up to the managers. I've worked on systems where
performance-critical parts were written in C++ (and the rest in Java) and
where everything was required to be written in Java (and the performance-
critical parts were ****ed out as good as it gets in Java).

> I see value in both languages, however, it appears as though many people
> immediately dismiss Java, regardless of the scope and requirements of
> the project.

"All generalisations are wrong" -- unknown author. You would have to
put some numbers showing what you mean by "many". Is 10 out of 100000
-- many? IOW, how many is "many"? During my career I've never seen or
spoken to anyone who'd "immediately dismiss Java". And, believe me,
I've spoken to _many_.

V

..l.. ..u..

"Gaurav" <gaurav_7_7@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:7113e26f.0406152345.2f01b86c@posting.google.c om...
> http://www.sys-con.com/story/print.cfm?storyid=45250
>
> Any comments?
>
> Thanks
> Gaurav

Have you seen the size of the programs he is running? This is no
comparison, as the JVM may be much faster since the environment is already
loaded into memory. If he was medium to large scale projects, I would be
more keen to read the results.
Allan

..in.. ..usba..

> >> So there are something that may be do in C++ and not in Java?
> >
> > writing an OS ( Kernel ) ?
>
> The "Church Thesis"

nope.

> or "Turing-machine-computable" or ...
> ... means anything to you?

partially (that's the way lots of cpu's work)

>

so please:
-verbose

TIA
Rainer

..rn.. ..is..

> So there are something that may be do in C++ and not in Java?
> Interesting...
>
> Please give me your curriculum, so I can hire you in my company!

Well, how about:

long a, b, double c;
memcpy(&c, a, 4); memcpy(&c+4, b, 4);

or:

template <cl*** T> T& min(T &tParam1, T &tParam2) ...

or:
#ifndef DONT_WANT_THIS
gagagugu
#endif

.... ..b..

In article <2jadubFvhhfcU1@uni-berlin.de>,
"Gernot Frisch" <Me@Privacy.net> wrote:

>Next, gcc 3.3 is not really a good optimizing compiler. Better than
>2.95, but not as good as say the intel or the codewarrior compilers.

Interesting. I heard good things about the Intel compiler, so I
downloaded a demo and compiled my code with it (simulation, physics,
lots of object creation/destruction). And I found the code generated by
Intel to be 10% slower than that from GCC 2.95. That was one year ago.
Of course, I used the maximum machine specific optimization flags on
both compilers.

..rn.. ..is..

> Interesting. I heard good things about the Intel compiler, so I
> downloaded a demo and compiled my code with it (simulation, physics,
> lots of object creation/destruction). And I found the code generated
by
> Intel to be 10% slower than that from GCC 2.95. That was one year
ago.
> Of course, I used the maximum machine specific optimization flags on
> both compilers.

I use the GCC 3.4 vs the VS.net 7.1 compiler (which is from intel I
think) and it gives me you experience in reverse...
Maybe this is an ethic question?

-Gernot

..nça.. ..rrei..

> I use the GCC 3.4 vs the VS.net 7.1 compiler (which is from intel I
> think) and it gives me you experience in reverse...
> Maybe this is an ethic question?

VC++ compiler is from Microsoft and Intel C++ compiler is from.. well,
obviously Intel.

..lent.. ..homir..

> In every application (unless it's a really simple one) there are critical
> parts where performance is paramount.

An here is the contradction:
> "All generalisations are wrong" -- unknown author. You would have to
> put some numbers showing what you mean by "many". Is 10 out of 100000
> -- many? IOW, how many is "many"?


> During my career I've never seen or
> spoken to anyone who'd "immediately dismiss Java". And, believe me,
> I've spoken to _many_.

I did. All of them are VC++ programmers.