Get the latest Education e-news
 

Go Back   Game Career Guide Forums > Programming
Forum Home Register Members List Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-14-2010, 03:58 AM   #11
yaustar
Administrator
 
yaustar's Avatar

Activity Longevity
2/20 19/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss2272
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
Edit: Unity now supports full integration with JavaScript.
Er... Java isn't anything like Javascript if that is what you are implying.

Java relies on the target platform having a Java VM port. For example, Java won't work on the Wii, PS3, or 360 until someone ports the VM.

Java won't force you to learn OO programming. I can still write procedural code in Java really easily simply by using one 'class'.

Not really sure how Java makes you learn how to write more robust code then C++ either. I know it doesn't rely on the programmer to do everything such as memory management but it doesn't make the programmer learn more, its just the language they are using is higher level and inherently more 'robust'.

Last edited by yaustar : 01-14-2010 at 02:06 PM.
yaustar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2010, 07:08 AM   #12
Huogo Furi
Junior Member

Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssssss27
Location: Florida
Default

Im sure that Java is probably a good language for me to learn still, but I personally (after having done some research) think that I should learn C++ first.

If Java was based off C++ learning it first would give me a background... also if I have to learn Memory Management in C++ it could be a convienient skill to have in the future with coding (especially since I plan to learn Lua which if I remember correctly req. you to know some about Memory Management).

But going with what Yaustar said
Quote:
Java relies on the target platform having a Java VM port. For example, Java won't work on the Wii, PS3, or 360 until someone ports the VM.
If it doesnt work on Console programming, wouldn't I be better off learning C++ first? Nobody said "Don't learn Java" I'll probably still learn Java just out of curiosity. I stated in my 1st post that I've got a moderate background of knowledge in programming, so C++ seems like a good place to start.
Huogo Furi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2010, 02:04 PM   #13
yaustar
Administrator
 
yaustar's Avatar

Activity Longevity
2/20 19/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss2272
Location: UK
Default

Low level memory management is not needed for Lua.
yaustar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2010, 02:15 PM   #14
Huogo Furi
Junior Member

Activity Longevity
0/20 13/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssssss27
Location: Florida
Default

Huh, thought it did... I stand corrected.
Huogo Furi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2010, 04:47 PM   #15
Zooch
Senior Member

Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 ssssss186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yaustar View Post
Er... Java isn't anything like Javascript if that is what you are implying.

Java relies on the target platform having a Java VM port. For example, Java won't work on the Wii, PS3, or 360 until someone ports the VM.
I wasn't implying that - I was trying to point out that Java (and similar branches like JavaScript) is becoming more and more useful with the emerging trends. Mobile games is one example.

Quote:
Java won't force you to learn OO programming. I can still write procedural code in Java really easily simply by using one 'class'.

Not really sure how Java makes you learn how to write more robust code then C++ either. I know it doesn't rely on the programmer to do everything such as memory management but it doesn't make the programmer learn more, its just the language they are using is higher level and inherently more 'robust'.
I obviously have poor word choice. No language "forces" you to learn OO programming, but if you want to be a mediocre (or better) programmer you need to learn about OOP. My experience as well as popular opinion claim that it's easier to learn OO design in Java than in C++.

I guess I assumed that since Java supports a more robust programming style that a fledgling programmer would try to take advantage of that and not just skimp by on learning as little as possible. (Read: learning how to avoid one of Java's biggest advantages by misinterpreting the purpose of classes and only ever use one).

Lastly, memory management and data structures are both near identical in C++ and Java, which is the case with most everything else. It boils down to a matter of opinion.

With that said, console game developers should probably start programming in assembly language to maximize efficiency. How's that for an opinion! I know Naughty Dog would agree.

Last edited by Zooch : 01-14-2010 at 04:51 PM.
Zooch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 06:26 AM   #16
DTR
Member

Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssssss94
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zooch View Post
With that said, console game developers should probably start programming in assembly language to maximize efficiency. How's that for an opinion! I know Naughty Dog would agree.

As long as the hardware the game is developed on is constant and the 90/10 law is minded... Why not?

After all, compiler is nothing more than an aid in writing assembly, which itself is an aid in writing machine instructions.
DTR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 08:15 AM   #17
Adrir
Administrator
 
Adrir's Avatar

Activity Longevity
1/20 20/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1467
Location: London, UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DTR View Post
As long as the hardware the game is developed on is constant and the 90/10 law is minded... Why not?
Productivity?
__________________
Michael 'Adrir' Scott :: Games, Virtual Worlds, Education
Networking | Current Project | Research | Teaching
Adrir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 08:53 AM   #18
yaustar
Administrator
 
yaustar's Avatar

Activity Longevity
2/20 19/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss2272
Location: UK
Default

Quote:
My experience as well as popular opinion claim that it's easier to learn OO design in Java than in C++.
Hmm... I would argue that it doesn't matter as you should later, the data structures are virtually the same. The higher level concepts is what most people fall over on.

Quote:
I guess I assumed that since Java supports a more robust programming style
What is this robust programming style?

Quote:
Lastly, memory management and data structures are both near identical in C++ and Java, which is the case with most everything else. It boils down to a matter of opinion.
Data structures, yes. Memory management (especially lower level), definitely not.

Quote:
With that said, console game developers should probably start programming in assembly language to maximize efficiency.
C was made to be 'portable assembly' so we sort of are anyway.
yaustar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 09:42 AM   #19
DTR
Member

Activity Longevity
0/20 17/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssssss94
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrir View Post
Productivity?
Yes.

That was what I tried to refer to with my 90/10 reference.
For the 90% of the code, it hardly makes much difference what you code it with. But those 10% of the code tend to be what the program spends its time playing with.


And the moment comes after we profile these sections out from the code, when we can get creative with assembly language. Compilers are good and well in the general case.

But with some knowledge of computer architecture and assembly language, you could gain a lot by seeing from the disassebly what the compiler has made of your high level instructions. If you can do better, here is the time to do so.

However, optimizing the code is worth nil , if the data handled is not handled well either. The 32 or so cycles that you might save could be wasted in a single avoidable cache miss. ( Not that cycle counting is anywhere near relevant these days )
DTR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2010, 04:42 PM   #20
Adrir
Administrator
 
Adrir's Avatar

Activity Longevity
1/20 20/20
Today Posts
0/11 sssss1467
Location: London, UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DTR View Post
That was what I tried to refer to with my 90/10 reference. For the 90% of the code, it hardly makes much difference what you code it with. But those 10% of the code tend to be what the program spends its time playing with.
Ah, yes. Of course. It seems I'm a bit braindead at the moment - I totally missed that for some reason! Sounds good to me.

Although, having recently been reading a few GPU Gem articles, I think it is becoming more popular to attempt to boost speed using the GPU.
__________________
Michael 'Adrir' Scott :: Games, Virtual Worlds, Education
Networking | Current Project | Research | Teaching
Adrir is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:07 PM.






UBM Tech