From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,328622178ec8b832 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,3cfb037adfeca545,start X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: bill@cafe.net (Kaz Kylheku) Subject: Re: Which language pays most -- C++ vs. Java? Date: 1998/01/30 Message-ID: <6atbro$jnd$1@brie.direct.ca>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 320651422 References: <6at330$7uj$1@mainsrv.main.nc.us> <34D22794.1DEE0535@platinum.brooks.af.mil> Reply-To: kaz@cafe.net Organization: Internet Direct Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.misc,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-01-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <34D22794.1DEE0535@platinum.brooks.af.mil>, Charles W. Hall wrote: >Having worked with assembly code, operating systems internals, and done >high level programming, I don't think it is relevant for programmers to >know these sort of things anymore. There is no reason to program in >assembler directly anymore except for highly specialized cases. The Just because you don't use something doesn't mean that you derive no benefit from knowing it. >internals of generated code have nothing to do with designing a >correctly running program in FORTRAN, COBOL, C, or anyother high level >language. The operating system software is designed by experts to >properly handle the compiled code and to perform tasks as paging, >swapping, and scheduling. These are not the domain of the programmer. Not knowing how the paging works could lead the programmer to make poor choices for accessing some large structure. Scheduling is often the domain of the programmer; if you are working with threads, it is useful to know what priority inversion is and what strategies can be used to alleviate it. >Criticizing a programmer for not knowing the internals of the operating >system is like criticizing an automobile owner for not understanding the >internals of the car's motor. It is not necessary for successful >operation of the car or computer system. That is a poor analogy, because the operator of the car is a mere user. He or she is not constructing components to be added to the car. If someone were adding an air-conditioning system to the car, I might well expect them to be familiar with the electrical system.