Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 6 Mar 2002 12:09:35 -0700
From:      Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com>, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, Kenneth Culver <culverk@alpha.yumyumyum.org>, "Steve B." <steveb99@earthlink.net>, "Eugene L. Vorokov" <vel@bugz.infotecs.ru>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: C vs C++
Message-ID:  <15494.26991.417780.56393@caddis.yogotech.com>
In-Reply-To: <3C866897.649BCC6F@mindspring.com>
References:  <20020305164151.T5854-100000@alpha.yumyumyum.org> <3C8529DA.FA8ABCE@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20020306073237.00cd0b00@localhost> <3C8659BC.C2FD35ED@mindspring.com> <15494.23436.196349.224108@caddis.yogotech.com> <3C8661EB.934CC478@mindspring.com> <15494.25629.4763.761844@caddis.yogotech.com> <3C866897.649BCC6F@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Again, that's subjective to you.  I've been doing C++ for
> > > about 20 years now
> > 
> > I find that *really* hard to believe, since C++ hasn't been out for that
> > long. :) :) :)
> > 
> > (I've got Stroustrup's book next to me, and it wasn't even started until
> > '85, and I don't know when the first C++ compiler became publically
> > available.)
> 
> I'm rounding... 8-).  We had "cfront" and "The Oregon C++
> Compiler" back in the early 1980's (definitely before 1985,
> since I was working by then).

Again, you *couldn't* have, since it didn't exist.

> > > The other advantage is that the C++ code ran in a known,
> > > deterministic amount of memory on an embedded system;
> > > Java VM's, even Kaffe, seem to want to take at least 8M
> > > of memory.
> > 
> > Kaffe wasn't a good implementation of the VM.  However, I will state
> > that the minimum size was quite large.  (No worse than most other
> > interpreted languages).  However, it didn't have to get any bigger.  I
> > had a server that server 400 real-time clients running in under 24MB on
> > a Sparc/RISC platform.
> 
> The costs are much less if you can share a JVM, that's
> true.  But comparing the Sun JVM with the Kaffe, I've
> actually never seen the Sun JVM smaller.  Kaffe is really
> surprisingly small-footed for a JVM.  8-).

My experience differs with yours.  (However, I'm comparing Sun's JDK1.0
vs. Kaffe, since Kaffe didn't support many 1.1 features, and as such
wasn't usable for 1.1.)




Nate

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15494.26991.417780.56393>