* Commentary on Industry Move to C++ @ 2001-08-24 0:29 Gary Scott 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Gary Scott @ 2001-08-24 0:29 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi, I've had some time now to consider the recent trends of my industry moving new projects to C++. As a lead system test engineer, I am now inclined to approve of this trend. I anticipate much more business (testing) in the future due to a significant increase in the number of software anomalies. This I feel will keep me gainfully employed for a number of additional years while also making my job much more interesting (more challenging anomalies to solve). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-24 0:29 Commentary on Industry Move to C++ Gary Scott @ 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 10:14 ` It must surely be better Petter Fryklund ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrzej Lewandowski @ 2001-08-24 2:49 UTC (permalink / raw) "Gary Scott" <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com> wrote in message news:3B859FCD.5FEA40DD@lmtas.lmco.com... > Hi, > > I've had some time now to consider the recent trends of my industry > moving new projects to C++. As a lead system test engineer, I am now > inclined to approve of this trend. I anticipate much more business > (testing) in the future due to a significant increase in the number of > software anomalies. This I feel will keep me gainfully employed for a > number of additional years while also making my job much more > interesting (more challenging anomalies to solve). I don't know what is your industry. But industry in general has already moved to Java and VB and will be moving pretty soon to C#. According to recent statistics (don't remember the source - Gartner?...) number of programmers using Java is karger than the number of programmers using C++ A.L. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* It must surely be better ... 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski @ 2001-08-24 10:14 ` Petter Fryklund 2001-08-24 13:57 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 13:53 ` Commentary on Industry Move to C++ Gary Scott ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Petter Fryklund @ 2001-08-24 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw) to be one of few excellent than ome of many mediocre ... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: It must surely be better ... 2001-08-24 10:14 ` It must surely be better Petter Fryklund @ 2001-08-24 13:57 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 13:34 ` Petter Fryklund 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Andrzej Lewandowski @ 2001-08-24 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw) "Petter Fryklund" <qsbpefr@esavionics.se> wrote in message news:9m5898$9i$1@newstoo.ericsson.se... > to be one of few excellent than ome of many mediocre ... > What if you cannot put your excellence into the pot, or use it to put the mortgage?... If you read science-fiction, then there is a book Cyberiad by Lem. Quote: "Chinese Fu was taught by Chinese Ku how to kill dragoons. Education lasted 50 years. When Fu graduated with distinctions, he wanted to test his skills. Unfortunately, he was unable to find a dragoon". A.L. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: It must surely be better ... 2001-08-24 13:57 ` Andrzej Lewandowski @ 2001-08-24 13:34 ` Petter Fryklund 0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Petter Fryklund @ 2001-08-24 13:34 UTC (permalink / raw) Guess I'm fortunate then. Andrzej Lewandowski wrote in message <3b864e80_3@news3.prserv.net>... > >"Petter Fryklund" <qsbpefr@esavionics.se> wrote in message news:9m5898$9i$1@newstoo.ericsson.se... > >> to be one of few excellent than ome of many mediocre ... >> > >What if you cannot put your excellence into the pot, or use it to put the mortgage?... > >If you read science-fiction, then there is a book Cyberiad by Lem. Quote: "Chinese Fu was >taught by Chinese Ku how to kill dragoons. Education lasted 50 years. When Fu graduated >with distinctions, he wanted to test his skills. Unfortunately, he was unable to find a dragoon". > >A.L. > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 10:14 ` It must surely be better Petter Fryklund @ 2001-08-24 13:53 ` Gary Scott 2001-08-25 1:51 ` James Rogers 2001-08-24 16:59 ` Robert Dewar 2001-08-26 15:42 ` David Botton 3 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: Gary Scott @ 2001-08-24 13:53 UTC (permalink / raw) Aerospace/embedded processors. There's absolutely no way anyone would consider Java given current processor performance and real-time processing requirements. Andrzej Lewandowski wrote: > > "Gary Scott" <Gary.L.Scott@lmtas.lmco.com> wrote in message news:3B859FCD.5FEA40DD@lmtas.lmco.com... > > Hi, > > > > I've had some time now to consider the recent trends of my industry > > moving new projects to C++. As a lead system test engineer, I am now > > inclined to approve of this trend. I anticipate much more business > > (testing) in the future due to a significant increase in the number of > > software anomalies. This I feel will keep me gainfully employed for a > > number of additional years while also making my job much more > > interesting (more challenging anomalies to solve). > > I don't know what is your industry. But industry in general has > already moved to Java and VB and will be moving pretty soon to C#. > According to recent statistics (don't remember the source - Gartner?...) > number of programmers using Java is karger than the number of > programmers using C++ > > A.L. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-24 13:53 ` Commentary on Industry Move to C++ Gary Scott @ 2001-08-25 1:51 ` James Rogers 2001-08-25 6:32 ` Al Christians 0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread From: James Rogers @ 2001-08-25 1:51 UTC (permalink / raw) Even more direct than that, look at the license agreement for the Java development kit. It specifically states that the user will not use the kit to produce software to control airplanes, or air traffic control systems. I assume Sun has some reasons for insisting you know not to use Java for these purposes. Jim Rogers Colorado Springs, Colorado USA Gary Scott wrote: > > Aerospace/embedded processors. There's absolutely no way anyone would > consider Java given current processor performance and real-time > processing requirements. > > Andrzej Lewandowski wrote: ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-25 1:51 ` James Rogers @ 2001-08-25 6:32 ` Al Christians 2001-08-25 7:12 ` James Rogers 2001-08-29 21:26 ` Michael Bode 0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Al Christians @ 2001-08-25 6:32 UTC (permalink / raw) James Rogers wrote: > > > I assume Sun has some reasons for insisting you know not to use Java > for these purposes. > They say it's because of timing -- ie because of garbage collection -- they can't make it a sure thing that it will accomplish anything in a given amount of time. But they also say that it's not an admission that it's likely to crash or give the wrong answers. That's really a JVM issue, not a Java issue -- there are many languages running on JVM these days. Al ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-25 6:32 ` Al Christians @ 2001-08-25 7:12 ` James Rogers 2001-08-29 21:26 ` Michael Bode 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: James Rogers @ 2001-08-25 7:12 UTC (permalink / raw) Al Christians wrote: > > James Rogers wrote: > > > > > > I assume Sun has some reasons for insisting you know not to use Java > > for these purposes. > > > > They say it's because of timing -- ie because of garbage collection > -- they can't make it a sure thing that it will accomplish anything > in a given amount of time. But they also say that it's not an > admission that it's likely to crash or give the wrong answers. > > That's really a JVM issue, not a Java issue -- there are many > languages running on JVM these days. Timing is a JVM issue. It is also a Java issue. My experience is that the Java language in general, and Java standard API classes in particular, are relatively inefficient. Java static data members are allocated on a stack. All other Java non primitive data items are allocated dynamically. Aside from the fact that additional overhead is involved in marking and deallocating dynamic memory, the most common Java programming models allocate a lot of memory when other languages like Ada, C, Basic, Pascal, etc will not need to allocate memory. This addiction to allocation produces performance problems that affect both timing and memory utilization. For instance, using a Java collection, such as a HashMap to store values associated with unique keys requires that all items stored must be instances of classes, not primitive types. How, then, do you store numeric types in a HashMap? Simple. You convert the numeric type to its corresponding wrapper class. The primary reason to use a HashMap is for rapid access to the values contained therein. If you want to total values read from an input stream by key value you will need to increment the values stored in the HashMap. Unfortunately, the numeric wrapper classes are incapable of performing math operations. You must convert the wrapper class object to a primitive type, perform the calculations, then create a new numeric wrapper object and put it in the HashMap under the same key. All this conversion, allocation, and reassignment is expensive. Timing is affected greatly. (Of course, each of those objects must be eventually deallocated or "collected" by the GC, which even if it were deterministic would still have a serious affect on timing.) Java also demonstrates plenty of unpredictability with its thread model. Releasing a thread from a "wait" call is accomplished by having another thread call the "notify" or the "notifyAll" method. The "notify" method causes the virtual machine to release one thread from the wait state. There is no sense of a queue in the "wait" state corresponding to an Ada entry queue. You have no way of knowing which thread will be affected by a "notify" call. It may be one that must immediately return to the "wait" state because its boundary condition has not been satisfied. If so, then you can encounter a deadlock because the expected thread was not activated. The common wisdom is that one should never use "notify". Instead, one should always use "notifyAll". "notifyAll" releases all threads from the "wait" state. This avoids deadlock, because one of the waiting threads will discover a satisfied boundary condition and continue. All other threads will have to return to the "wait" state. This approach avoids deadlocks but produces timing variations, depending on the number of threads in the "wait" state. Java provides no remedy for this timing issue. Jim Rogers Colorado Springs, Colorado USA ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-25 6:32 ` Al Christians 2001-08-25 7:12 ` James Rogers @ 2001-08-29 21:26 ` Michael Bode 1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Michael Bode @ 2001-08-29 21:26 UTC (permalink / raw) Al Christians <achrist@easystreet.com> writes: > They say it's because of timing -- ie because of garbage collection > -- they can't make it a sure thing that it will accomplish anything > in a given amount of time. But they also say that it's not an > admission that it's likely to crash or give the wrong answers. > > That's really a JVM issue, not a Java issue -- there are many > languages running on JVM these days. Just a data point: Siemens is propagating Java for real time development these days. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 10:14 ` It must surely be better Petter Fryklund 2001-08-24 13:53 ` Commentary on Industry Move to C++ Gary Scott @ 2001-08-24 16:59 ` Robert Dewar 2001-08-26 15:42 ` David Botton 3 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: Robert Dewar @ 2001-08-24 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw) "Andrzej Lewandowski" <lewandoREMOVE@attglobal.net> wrote in message news:<3b85b1fc_1@news3.prserv.net>... > I don't know what is your industry. But industry in general has > already moved to Java and VB and will be moving pretty soon to C#. > According to recent statistics (don't remember the source - > Gartner?...) number of programmers using Java is karger than the > number of programmers using C++ And the number of programmers using WORD macros is no doubt even higher, as is the number of programmers using Visual Basic and COBOL, but raw numbers like this don't tell you much. Certainly in large segments of the industry, in particular the segments in which Ada is a large player, Java has only a slight presence, and is unlikely to make substantial inroads in the near future. It will be a while before we have either a commercial plane or a military fighter, or an air traffic control system entirely programmed in Java, if ever. As for the C# comment, this is mere speculation -- a lot of observers, even those who think that .NET will be wildly successful (itself not a forgone conclusion) think that other languages will dominate C# in this environment. Just because Microsoft champions something does not mean it will succeed. Remember that OS/2 version 1 was a Microsoft production, as were the pre 3.0 windows versions. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: Commentary on Industry Move to C++ 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2001-08-24 16:59 ` Robert Dewar @ 2001-08-26 15:42 ` David Botton 3 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread From: David Botton @ 2001-08-26 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: comp.lang.ada > I don't know what is your industry. But industry in general has > already moved to Java and VB and will be moving pretty soon to C#. Perhaps in IT shops (who have never used C/C++ or Ada for the most part), but not in applications or system development for any significant industry or market. > According to recent statistics (don't remember the source - Gartner?...) > number of programmers using Java is karger than the number of > programmers using C++ That is because the term "programmer" is used very loosely :-) David Botton ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2001-08-29 21:26 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2001-08-24 0:29 Commentary on Industry Move to C++ Gary Scott 2001-08-24 2:49 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 10:14 ` It must surely be better Petter Fryklund 2001-08-24 13:57 ` Andrzej Lewandowski 2001-08-24 13:34 ` Petter Fryklund 2001-08-24 13:53 ` Commentary on Industry Move to C++ Gary Scott 2001-08-25 1:51 ` James Rogers 2001-08-25 6:32 ` Al Christians 2001-08-25 7:12 ` James Rogers 2001-08-29 21:26 ` Michael Bode 2001-08-24 16:59 ` Robert Dewar 2001-08-26 15:42 ` David Botton
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox