| User | Post |
neotransotaku
Posts: 2687/4016 |
Originally posted by loadingNOW
it's a pain to do java stuff in c++? eh? no. the whole cpp is hard stuff is just a myth it's not that hard. all these crappy apis are the hard part but c++ it'self isn't.
APIs are fun because there is no point in re-inventing the wheel  although, it's a pain to work with Object 
anyways, it's just preference--there are certain things in Java I dont' need to worry about in C/C++ and vice versa. That is why it's easier for me to develop in Java because of technical errors I didn't account for in C/C++... oh well, program the way you want and I'll program my way |
||bass
Posts: 240/817 |
If you're interested in doing Managed C++ (.NET) then take the Java class. The C++ will be so easy to learn once you know Java, you'll be able to teach yourself everything you need to know within a few days. |
loadingNOW
Posts: 50/61 |
it's a pain to do java stuff in c++? eh? no. the whole cpp is hard stuff is just a myth it's not that hard. all these crappy apis are the hard part but c++ it'self isn't. |
neotransotaku
Posts: 2679/4016 |
Originally posted by Gavin
sure, if you're retarded .
I know I am, you don't have to remind me
Originally posted by Gavin
if you're anywhere close to a half-decent programer there really isn't much that should throw you for a loop in C++. it's a fairly straight-forward syntax, even if used for an introductory language (which i'd actually recommend). and personally, as far as java is concerned, i feel that limiting the programmer to one, and only one code structure is pretty fucking retarded.
Yeah, the syntax is straightforward enough for introduction. But when you start using the more advance stuff of friends, virtual, and company it becomes confusing to learn. The same stuff I can do in Java can be done in C++ but it seems a pain to do so.
Java has one code structure...then what kind of code structures does C++ have? |
Gavin
Posts: 556/799 |
Originally posted by neotransotaku
as for slow--java is mostly for server or cross platform applications. using to write a CPU demanding game is usually out of the question but there is a debate between C vs. Java so yeah. To me, they are equally as fast with computers today. But C is more efficient since it compiles to CPU code while Java must run through an interpreter. Slowness also is influenced by computer make up--Java runs just fine for me but if the HD is going constantly then well, it is almost impossible to run.
Anyways, Java (to me) is the best way to learn Object Oriented Programming. C++ has nasty syntax that doesn't make it kind to OOP learning.
sure, if you're retarded . if you're anywhere close to a half-decent programer there really isn't much that should throw you for a loop in C++. it's a fairly straight-forward syntax, even if used for an introductory language (which i'd actually recommend). and personally, as far as java is concerned, i feel that limiting the programmer to one, and only one code structure is pretty fucking retarded. |
loadingNOW
Posts: 49/61 |
a very simple example:
when calculating 2^100 you can do it with a loop - simply mulitplying with 2 100 times. well needless to say this way sucks unless your exponents are very small. 100 mod 2 = 0 so we can do 2^100 = (2*2)^50 = (4*4)^25 = 16^24 * 16 = (256^12)*16 = 65536^6 * 16 = ...
simply checking if the exponent is odd or even does the trick
so if you program algoritm 1 in c and 2 in basic the basic version will be faster for big exponents.
of course if you're positive all your algorithms are great you can go ahead and kill overhead by using c or even asm.
of course this is just an example - you normally use very optimized standart libs for something like this. |
Squash Monster
Posts: 531/677 |
My school did the same thing with our Computer Science class. However, it has turned out to be a blessing, as Java is really bloody spiffy.
Java does all the object oriented types of things very well, and it has a metric crapload of useful classes to help out.
Also-
Originally posted by neotransotaku
using to write a CPU demanding game is usually out of the question
Pshaw to that. I've been programming a game in Java.
http://squashmonster.tripod.com/Treasure/treasureGameSSA.png
http://squashmonster.tripod.com/Treasure/treasureGameSSD.png
3D graphics are usually considered to be CPU demanding, but I've not dropped below 60fps yet. You could compare VB to assembly for all it matters -- the way you program it matters a lot more than the innefficiency of nearly any programming language (unless you're using something intentionally lousy like Whenever or whatever the one I'm thinking of was called).
Say Java took 1.5 seconds for what C++ did in 1 (that's way overkill, I'm sure). Now say you have a generic RTS with two sides, with n units on each side trying to find the nearest enemy. That's 2n^2 times through some logic in a for loop with the most obvious way of programming it. If you quickly made a grid and put the ID of each unit at its location, however, you would have to go through some logic 2n times. If you had 10 units on each side, that's 200 vs 20. That's 10 times, not 1.5 -- in almost every case, the difference in efficiency between any two languages is negligable. |
Nebetsu
Posts: 981/1574 |
Yeah. The thing is: Here VB6 is Computer Programming 10. I dont think we'll be doing it in Computer Programming 12. |
HyperLamer
Posts: 3147/8210 |
Ugh, this same thing happened to me. They mentioned C but we ended up with Java and Turing instead.  But the next year, we did VB6.  I don't think my mark ever dropped below 90 that year. The teacher would look at my code and just walk off confused, it rocked. |
Jesper
Posts: 1889/2390 |
What dan said is true. I couldn't program any of Java, Objective-C and C# two years ago. Can now. |
dan
Posts: 404/782 |
Once you learn Java, it shouldn't be too hard to learn C++. In fact, once you learn any object orientated programming language, it's not hard to learn another one. |
neotransotaku
Posts: 2067/4016 |
as for slow--java is mostly for server or cross platform applications. using to write a CPU demanding game is usually out of the question but there is a debate between C vs. Java so yeah. To me, they are equally as fast with computers today. But C is more efficient since it compiles to CPU code while Java must run through an interpreter. Slowness also is influenced by computer make up--Java runs just fine for me but if the HD is going constantly then well, it is almost impossible to run.
Anyways, Java (to me) is the best way to learn Object Oriented Programming. C++ has nasty syntax that doesn't make it kind to OOP learning. |
Nebetsu
Posts: 968/1574 |
Originally posted by Black Lord
be glad your school offers more then just qbasic... plus if you want to C++ that bad just find some tutorials...
I LOVE QUICKBASIC! You probably could tell from my layout anyways, but its awesome!!!!
I would take QuickBasic over Java any day. At least QB runs well on my computer! |
Black Lord
Posts: 175/453 |
be glad your school offers more then just qbasic... plus if you want to C++ that bad just find some tutorials... |
windwaker
Posts: 1114/1797 |
Well, one usually takes Java before they take C/C++; I doubt you'll do Java the entire time. |
Nebetsu
Posts: 965/1574 |
Well basically I went into the CP11 class because I wanted to do C++. So all through the semester, I'm waiting excitedly to take a C++ class. The teacher said that we most likely would be doing C++. At the last minute, everything goes wrong. Turns out we're doing Java. All I know about it is that it runs REALLY slow on my computer and isnt for people who want to make programs that will run very quickly and efficiently. Can anyone give me some more on what to expect for the course? |
