Curt, WE7U wrote:
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
This will be a user-interface issue, and we can let the interested
parties do that code. We have to make the interface specifications to
the daemon clean, and come up with a small-device transmit/receive plan.
--
Gerry Creager -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Texas Mesonet -- AATLT, Texas A&M University
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.862.3983
Office: 1700 Research Parkway Ste 160, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843
_______________________________________________
Xastir-dev mailing list
Xastir-dev@xastir.org
http://lists.xastir.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xastir-dev
