🚀 go-pugleaf

G'day Dave,
Thank you for your comments - much appreciated,
I seem to think along similar lines......
Nice as Java seems to be, I don't want slow....
So I'll give it a go with a medium sized test app,
and do some comparisons...
Thanks Again,
Derek
Australia

Dave Bird <dave@xemu.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:RfGmCUBpl405EwfS@xemu.demon.co.uk...
> In article <uZJA5.60133$c5.166398@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>, Derek
> <NO_SPAMdcrookes@bigpond.com> writes
> >Hi All,
> >I am evaluating Jbuilder for possible use......and would like some
> >advice....
> >
> >The manual suggests that Jbuilder, could be used to build any
application,
> >i.e. it seems to suggest that once could use it instead of Delphi or C++
> >etc..
> >
> >What would be the benefit/drawbacks of designing commercial quality apps
> >with Jbuilder, as opposed to say Delphi or C++ or others.
>
>
>  There are a number of development systems for different languages
>  which allow you to build graphical user interfaces by drag and drop,
>  including visual C++/CBuilder,  visual Java/Jbuilder, visual Basic,
>  and visual Pascal/"Delphi".
>
>
>  The advantage of basic is that it's simpler than the others to get
>  into, but it's clunky and less powerful and less easy to get things
>  done once you've learned it. There are no advantages at all to Pascal:
>  if you want a dinosaur, buy a brontosaurus. VBasic is like Cobol, there
>  is an awful lot of software written in it and never rewritten even
>  though it's naff. Pascal is like RPG: **somebody** somewhere has a
>  load of legacy software in Pascal and won't let go, even though
>  it's gutwrenchingly awful even to contemplate the stuff.
>
>  The important ones are Java and C++, where the comparison goes....
>
>
>  Java is intermediate code, it will always be slower than C++; C++
>  always gives ultimate speed. Since it is intermediate code, Java is
>  very portable between many machines and operating systems; C++ isn't
>  in practice.  You can write the same app between different machines,
>  but you'll mess around endlessly trying make it actually work on them.
>
>  C++ is that bit more powerful and that bit harder to learn. C++ lets
>  you do anything but that means it lets you make mistakes, and bad or
>  unfinished C++ programs are murder for stuff like memory leaks; Java
>  is more restrictive, but protects you from many errors and crashes.
>  Java deals with the issue of classes better and more cleanly.  Java is
>  definitely the nicer one to program in, though you may be less pleased
>  with the ultimate performance of the result on your particular machine.
>
>
>
> --
>    ^-^-^-@@-^-;-^   http://www.xemu.demon.co.uk/
>         (..)__u     news:alt.smoking.mooses