Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I hate to say this, but Java was *designed* for embedded programming. 

  I wonder about their design choices given that it was intended originally
for *embedded* (rather than desktop) systems. "Embedded system" usually
implies extremely low amount of RAM and very slow processors (especially
back when Java was first designed). Even if the Java program could be
compiled to native machine code for the target system (are there any such
compilers in actuality, for any embedded system?) which would mostly solve
the speed problem, it would still suffer from the memory consumption problem.

  No statically allocatable objects (including no support for arrays of
objects) and all objects always having dynamic binding means inevitably
increased memory consumption. (Also constant allocation/deallocation of
objects induces memory fragmentation, increasing overall memory consumption
as time passes, unless the system implements some form of memory
defragmentation scheme, which might be implausible for an embedded system,
especially at that time.)

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message