• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Native Java (was Re: Learning Cocoa ..).
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Native Java (was Re: Learning Cocoa ..).


  • Subject: Re: Native Java (was Re: Learning Cocoa ..).
  • From: tyler <email@hidden>
  • Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:01:51 -0700

On Tuesday, July 17, 2001, at 05:34 PM, Clark S. Cox III wrote:

On Monday, July 16, 2001, at 09:37 , Tyler LaGrange wrote:

Brilliant! You took the words right out of my mouth. I had marked
Andre's message as the one message in this thread that made me mad
enough to want to respond to - and then I got to this one - which beat
me to it.


<SNIP>
Honestly - ObjC isn't that tough to learn - and there really are some
good points (I absolutely hate the memory management stuff though -
blech). But Java just seems so much more logical to stick with - for
myself and many others out there. It's not cause we can't learn ObjC -
or that we feel like old NeXT programmers when we see it - but because
it is easier for us. I'd probably even learn SmallTalk or Lisp or
something if it was the only interface in to OSX.

I would have no problem recommending that someone use Java for Cocoa apps, if it weren't for the larger memory footprint, and slowdown caused by the VM. Unless we get a Java that is compiled directly to machine code (not Java byte code), this difference will never go away. Take any Cocoa app written in Java, and re-write it in Obj-C, and you will get a faster, smaller, and less-resource intensive app.

YES! Java compiled to native machine code -- THAT is what I want to see happen. I'd love to program Java for desktop applications, but I don't need the byte code cross-platform benefits. I advocated an installer that verifies the byte code and compiles it to native machine code to Metrowerks years ago, but nothing came of it.

I totally agree with Clark that the slowdown of the VM make java generally unsuitable for desktop applications in most cases today. I don't know about you, but I've yet to use a computer that was Truly so fast that I never wished it would hurry up already.

I don't think my (or your) users will appreciate that wehad an easier time coding the thing when they are faced with the slow functionality of it. But if we could have java at full speed (native machine code), THEN we'd have something!

Now I've always wondered if there were runtime issues that would make this impossible, or if it was just a choice that sun had made and that no one with the skill and time had taken the time to write the appropriate compiler/linker pieces...

tyler


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Native Java (was Re: Learning Cocoa ..).
      • From: "Andre Benassi" <email@hidden>
    • Re: Native Java (was Re: Learning Cocoa ..).
      • From: "John C. Randolph" <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Learning Cocoa (OT!: Small Language Rant) (From: "Clark S. Cox III" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Learning Cocoa (OT!: Small Language Rant)
  • Next by Date: When rabid threads have to be put to sleep...
  • Previous by thread: Re: Learning Cocoa (OT!: Small Language Rant)
  • Next by thread: Re: Native Java (was Re: Learning Cocoa ..).
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread