 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
>> Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
>>> I think for anything particularly useful, you're going to have big
>>> libraries anyway.
>>
>> I didn't say otherwise. I said .NET is closed and non-standardized
>> and C#
>> without it is like bread and no butter -- well, much worse actually...
>
> Yeah. And Erlang without the standard libraries (including gen_server,
> sasl, etc) isn't especially useful either.
Yes, except Erlang's libraries aren't closed technologies dictated by a
single monopolistic company trying to pass it as free and open by
standardizing just the language and very basic library. Anyone can
benefit, anyone can contribute and anyone can use without fear of
dependencies of closed technologies that change depending on
market/financial mood.
>> In the case of Java or Python at least, this leads to cross-platform
>> ease.
>
> Yeah, right. Let me know when you have cross-JVM ease, let alone
> cross-platform ease, with Java.
I run most Java or Python programs unmodified both at the WinBox at work
and at my Linux home box. The guy coding them doesn't have to worry
about hairy ifdefs or memory management to get it working on different
platforms. The only requirement is that he uses the standard
cross-platform API and doesn't rely on specific platform services.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I run most Java or Python programs unmodified both at the WinBox at work
> and at my Linux home box. The guy coding them doesn't have to worry
> about hairy ifdefs or memory management to get it working on different
> platforms. The only requirement is that he uses the standard
> cross-platform API and doesn't rely on specific platform services.
I saw a post in worsethanfailure of a Java method to copy files. It
created a .bat file with a 'copy' command, then ran it, and finally
deleted the .bat.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> I run most Java or Python programs unmodified both at the WinBox at work
> and at my Linux home box.
You're probably not doing too much hairy. I have to have three different
JVMs installed at work to use three different libraries from three
different partners.
I was always amused by the taglines that said things like
100% Java! (Requires Java 1.5.2)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> I run most Java or Python programs unmodified both at the WinBox at
>> work and at my Linux home box. The guy coding them doesn't have to
>> worry about hairy ifdefs or memory management to get it working on
>> different platforms. The only requirement is that he uses the
>> standard cross-platform API and doesn't rely on specific platform
>> services.
>
> I saw a post in worsethanfailure of a Java method to copy files. It
> created a .bat file with a 'copy' command, then ran it, and finally
> deleted the .bat.
yes, even Java with all its stupid "enterprise" limitations is
completely fool-proof!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 18:38:46 +0000, Orchid XP v7 wrote:
>>> Now you know why I dislike scripting languages in general. ;-)
>>
>> They work for what they're designed for - I use awk quite a bit, perl
>> occasionally, and shell scripts on rare occasions.
>>
>> But if I wanted to write something that was usuable by a general
>> computer user, I'd look to develop in a compiled language, as a general
>> rule.
>
> The kind of tasks I typically want to do involve heavy number crunching.
> Scripting languages aren't terribly suitable to this...
Scripting languages aren't designed for performance, as a general rule,
so yes, that wouldn't be appropriate for a scripting language if you have
complex calculations or lots of data to process.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
>> The kind of tasks I typically want to do involve heavy number crunching.
>> Scripting languages aren't terribly suitable to this...
>
> Scripting languages aren't designed for performance, as a general rule,
> so yes, that wouldn't be appropriate for a scripting language if you have
> complex calculations or lots of data to process.
This is the problem with POV-Ray's SDL. People *have* built physics
engines with it, but it's really not fantastically suitable for that task...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:12:04 +0000, Orchid XP v7 wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>>> The kind of tasks I typically want to do involve heavy number
>>> crunching. Scripting languages aren't terribly suitable to this...
>>
>> Scripting languages aren't designed for performance, as a general rule,
>> so yes, that wouldn't be appropriate for a scripting language if you
>> have complex calculations or lots of data to process.
>
> This is the problem with POV-Ray's SDL. People *have* built physics
> engines with it, but it's really not fantastically suitable for that
> task...
Well, I don't know that I'd call it a problem per se, more of a
limitation to be aware of.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
