On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 08:59:32 +0200 "Paulo Pinto" <pj...@progtools.org> wrote:
> >"Nick Sabalausky" wrote in message > >news:20120723010439.00006efc@unknown... I wouldn't know. I haven't > >actually dealt with the android SDK directly, only Marm. When I saw > >google saying you use either Java or straight natively-compiled C++, > >I guess I assumed that meant an actual C++ API. > > No, actually you are still dealing with JNI. Google's position on > native code, is that > you should use it just for code hotspots, gamming or to port "legacy" > code. > > [quote]In general, you should only use the NDK if it is essential to > your app— > never because you simply prefer to program in C/C++.[/quote] > > http://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/ndk/index.html > > The native activity is actually a Java Activity with a specific set > of methods defined > as native methods. > > http://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/NativeActivity.html > > You are only allowed to access these libraries: > > - libc (C library) headers > - libm (math library) headers > - JNI interface headers > - libz (Zlib compression) headers > - liblog (Android logging) header > - OpenGL ES 1.1 and OpenGL ES 2.0 (3D graphics libraries) headers > - libjnigraphics (Pixel buffer access) header (for Android 2.2 and > above). > - A Minimal set of headers for C++ support > - OpenSL ES native audio libraries > - Android native application APIS > > The Android native applications APIs are C wrappers around JNI calls, > meaning you get a performance > hit when calling them due to marshling. This is described in the > STABLE-APIS.html document delivered > as part of the NDK. > > [quote]Starting from API level 9, it is possible to entirely write an > Android > application with native code (i.e. without any Java). That does not > mean that your code does not run inside a VM though, and most of the > features of the platform will still need to be accessed through > JNI.[/quote] > > Java is the main language to develop standard applications on > Android, everything else are just > workarounds, even if we don't like it. > > Another example are the new low level Codec APIs in Jelly Bean, which > are only exposed directly via JNI to > Java. > > http://developer.android.com/reference/android/media/MediaCodec.html > Gah! What the fuck is this, 1998?!? (Why can't we finally just let Java die as the wretched idea it always was?) I've always seen Android as a slightly-less-shitty clone of iOS. But every time I turn around, I discover another way Google seems hell-bent on proving me wrong. They ape most of Apple's bad ideas and then toss in some of their own. How the hell is it even *possible* for another company to compete this well with Apple on retarded design decisions? I suppose with the death of Jobs it was inevitable for another company to successfully surpass Apple's horridness, but I always figured it would be from Apple getting slightly less crappy or fading back into their 90's obscurity where they belong - not from others sinking down to sub-Jobsian idiocy. I'd never even considered that a possibility. Very depressing. I miss Woz's computers. Fuck, I even miss the days when Microsoft ruled the world with an iron fist. At least back then platforms were open and software/hardware designs were relatively sane from a user's standpoint (even if the code behind them wasn't).
