What language to choose?

[yaustar]

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'.

[Huogo Furi]

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

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.

[yaustar]

Low level memory management is not needed for Lua.

[Huogo Furi]

Huh, thought it did... I stand corrected.

[Zooch]

Originally Posted by yaustar

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.

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.

[DTR]

Originally Posted by Zooch

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.

[Adrir]

Originally Posted by DTR

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

Productivity?

[yaustar]

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.

I guess I assumed that since Java supports a more robust programming style

What is this robust programming style?

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.

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.

[DTR]

Originally Posted by Adrir

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 )

[Adrir]

Originally Posted by DTR

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.