On Sun, 15 Jun 2008, Jason KG4WSV wrote: > Java, Ruby, Python, et al, seem to me to be rather heavy in terms of > system requirements good performance. Is this true? My knee-jerk > reaction is that the smaller devices (handhelds, old 486 computers, > etc) would be strained by the resource requirements for such a system.
I think Java ME is designed to support smaller devices. Java SE and Java EE are definitely for larger machines. > The (limited, anecdotal) experience I have with applications > implemented in these languages make me think they'd run faster if > written in C/C++. There are native-code compilers for Java that compile down to each machines assembly. Instead of byte-codes and a run-time interpreter, you have native-code. For the extreme small end, like 68HC11's, PIC's, AVR's, etc, I've seen it stated time and time again that writing code in C++ is foolhardy as the library size will kill you. In that case C is the way to go. Not that this size of processor is anything like what we'll be targeting with Xastir! hi hi -- Curt, WE7U. archer at eskimo dot com http://www.eskimo.com/~archer Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U. The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!" _______________________________________________ Xastir-dev mailing list Xastir-dev@xastir.org http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir-dev
