Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- From: "Victor Subervi" <victorsubervi@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:14:59 -0400
Perfect. Yet another reason to choose c++
Thanks,
Victor
On Dec 31, 2007 1:14 PM, Victor Subervi <victorsubervi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yuck. Steering clear of Java ..._______________________________________________
:)
Thanks,
Victor
On Dec 31, 2007 1:05 PM, Erich Dollansky <oceanare@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
Victor Subervi wrote:
commentGood point. Most legacy s/w is in C++. I'm assuming from lack of
that C# is as yet an unborn language ;)
there is another very simple problem with languages like C# or Java.
In the case of C, it is the developers machine which has to have the
proper software installed to compile it.
Java need the proper run-time and so the byte compiler installed on
every client machine. If you run into a very specific problem with the
byte-compiler, you have to have a specific version installed on all
clients.
In case of C, you can do a static link to minimise this impact.
Erich
freebsd-questions@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- References:
- Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- From: Victor Subervi
- Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- From: Erich Dollansky
- Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- From: Victor Subervi
- Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- From: Erich Dollansky
- Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- From: Victor Subervi
- Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- Prev by Date: Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- Next by Date: Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- Previous by thread: Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- Next by thread: Re: Low Level Language Suggestions: OT
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|