Of Interest to ASL fans

[Veldor]

Originally posted by Ludovic Coval

Yes and Veldor/Lars were talking of game development. DirectX has been wrote in C. Using C++ easy call to DX routines has both share the same calling/type convention. (i.e this avoid : 'How hell I call this function from language' question)

MFC is like any other development tool, it has its pro and con. It has the main advantage to be easy to use under VC++ and well documented (both inline and net). Remember, easy is fast, fast is money

Forms are more VB world, rarely VC++. The main option in VC++ is to use, or not, the ActiveX version of a given control : at least you have the choice. (I personaly dont use ActiveX).

You're rigth. However Win is 90% of market. Computer Wargame being already a niche market, portability is probably not a valid point here. ( Linux computer passionate wargamer user are probably quite rare as market 'target')

I'm probably an old fashionned developer but I like to know/control memory state Moreover as C/C++ make a wide use of pointers, it is also a critical point to avoid memory leak.

Hey Ludovic,

I agree with everything you said there. In fact you basically make the same points I do.

'Nuff said!

[larth]

I wrote this answer before reading the contribution by mac (Hi!), so please accept some overlapping. I was going to quit the discussion since it seemed to bring little of worth to me so most of these comments are for Veldor.

First:

Originally posted by Veldor
No, not really. You might need to reread my initial posts before you joined this topic. My complaint against JASL has everything to do with everything other than JAVA.

Please. Anyone following this thread can see that this is not true. After your initial questions on the legal statius of JASL, this is what you said before I joined the topic (italic emphasizes are mine):

What I've stated here is my personal opinion that I do not feel supporting yet another crappy JAVA version of ASL is good for the hobby or the ASL player.

and

Java is awful. It's not even worth an argument. I'll win it just by saying not a single commercial game product uses Java. It's doubtful it could ever be anywhere near that professional an application.... I could see some merit in a C++ or otherwise professional quality app.

and

And like I already stated if there is to be another "competing" product out there it is stupid as hell for it to be another Java based game (Even containing the same map and counter graphics).

and

And if you WERE going to make a seperate product.. You wouldnt do it with the very same tool as VASL. Not Java. You would use something else. Most likely C++, so that you could deliver the Game at a level and with features the java version couldnt.

and

As for what I believe the "next" PC adaptation of ASL should be: A commercial one. Why? Because we already have a "freebie" one. And a commercial app just simply will not be a java based one. Cold hearted fact.

and

It is a waste of time on the part of the developer, the ASL community, and MMP to support a DUPLICATE JAVA-BASED ASL Game.

and

Whether a better full pc version of ASL ever gets made or not my point is there is no need AT ALL for the other JAVA based version that is being done...

That was without anyone defending java. Sounds like panic to me.

Thereafter you expressed your satisifaction with my "legal steps" and continued to argue on anything from "Two different interfaces" (JASL & VASL), comparing Java to Visual Basic while stating that C++ must be used for an ASL program because it is the most widespread pc game programming language but didn't go into answering my questions there, then you go into my software experience (I have 25+ years of it from assemblers, to C and Java - what about you?), and continue state that why MS and .NET are gonna win, "And the final stake through every competing OS's heart!". I sense a personal agenda here.

I will give you that Linux is not the best platform for fast 3D games (yet). Heck, I can't get the Linux version of "Descent 3" to run properly. Nevertheless companies like IBM (mainframes and down) and SONY (PS2 & Media) are heavily investing into Linux, and each and every government / state (Oregon!) looking into it receives a special visit from Redmond - there is a MS memo at (http://www.opensource.org/halloween/halloween2.php) which is intresting. So at least there it is taken seriously.

These were not the reason for me using Java because they did not apply back then, but there are several reasons why Java is becomming more and more intresting as a games language: the potential market for Java games is larger than the market for windows-only games. An addition the mobile phones are heading to be the #1 games platform in numbers sold per year and 90% or so are java-enabled. there is this new java-addon for Gameboy Advance as well. Someone said that java skills are the most sought programming skill on www.dice.com (search on "java" or "c#") and there is a java gaming API for PC type platforms in the making as well. A bright future indeed for java.

Java productivity is amazing in my experience. I can say I would never have gotten as far as I have with JASL using a different language. The are comparisons which state that C++ code have 200 - 300% more bugs than java. IMO one distinct advantage is the removal of "#defines", separate files for headers and code, and global data areas. Yes, LC, I missed the pointers in the beginning but you get used to it.

Still choice of language is a personal matter to some degree but it doesn't change basic facts on usability of language. Java vs. C++ speed is almost on par with findings favouring one or the other. Certainly the difference is not big enough for a casual user, and certainly not for a strategy game. And, should it really be required, C++ code can be called using JNI. In fact this is one way many port their legacy software, moving it step to step to a java solution.

The free tools available for java - such as eclipse and its plugins (tech talk: refactoring anyone? background compilation when a changed file is saved, etc. etc.) - is mindboggling. Just about every aspect of program development is covered (metrics analyze, "cut and paste" detection, GUI tools, ready to use XML packages, and so on). Check out Sourceforge (http://sourceforge.net/ - click on foundries) which has a foundry for java (meaning it is big enough to warrant its own area). JBoss is leading contender for why java is used with 2 million downloads last year.

Or google for "java ai" if you believe that area is neglected in java. I think the major item stopping more programmers from taking a look at java is that it is not common knowledge how much there is already available in and for java.

You're welcome to your opinions of course. I believe in using the right tool for getting the job done. If it is easier for you to market your games (how many did you sell so far?) because they are written in C++ that is fine with me. Others may use C, Delphi, VB or assembler for theirs. Each to his own.

Mac: ugh - you are throwing my .sig into confusion! Perhaps we can consider it a mathematical expression 2 x b | ! 2 x b in a non-programmer syntax?

/Lars

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

Hmmm when I began this thread I sure had no idea it would end up here

I have been interested in trying to follow the comments (ending up feeling dumber and dumber though hehe).
I wonder how many others have been reading the thread with the same level of interest as me.

Veldor, to comment on "what else I want VASL to look like or do", hmm I am not yet that competent personally with it to have any comments at the moment.

Ease of use is usually my most paramount requirement. For me that means the program just simplifies my task. As I wouldn't be able to recognise Java or C++ if I was looking at them, I suppose, "ease of use" is about as analytical as I can get programing wise.

Ease of use means to me interface, the point where human meets computer program.
Currently, the easist game out there, is for me Strategic Command.

When you step back and don't discuse the game from the perspective of is the game "accurate" etc, you notice, that the game is very easy to actually "run" ie control ie play ie enjoy.

The game has a simple interface to set up your games options, then you enter the game.
To access unit commands, a right click on a unit does this.
To access the in game turn options a right click brings up the menu of game functions.
Thats about it. The game doesn't require a tutorial to run it, it's just to plain obvious.

Now I am not sure how that all relates to programing languages, but I hope it illustrates, I will go with the language, that best allows the software to be easy to actually employ.
If java and C++ can both accomplish this equally, then it is a non issue, only important to how much work is it for the dude working with it.

To use one of my favourite methods of discource....analogies...

if the job is normally done by a hand tool, and takes skill in the hand tool to be done correctly, but can also be done with a power tool...
... and the power tool requires no skill at all...
.... then those that have not the skill in the hand tool, will be uninclined to care what a persons opinion of hand tool skill is.

It is generally seen as elitist and arrogant behaviour to laud hand skill use over those not possessing it. And in a commercial shop, they won't even be interested in it being done by hand.
Speed, efficiency, and cost effectiveness will be all that counts.

It is well nigh possible, that a person that is a real programming genius, can out do a common person with a supposedly superior programming tool, whilst using a potentially inferior programming tool.

In that respect, it's not the programming tool that counts, but the person using it.

I have for instance said in a few posts where the game is concerned, that the guy that made Strategic Command, could likely be considered a better designer of wargame interfaces. (not sure what was used to make the game though).

[Mac_MatrixForum]

Ok, I will comment shortly to all the replies since I managed to keep the monster thread alive . I refrained copying your exact quotes since it would make this post even longer but I commented things in the order they were written.

Ludovic Coval

Awkward interfaces to foreign language libraries, as using DirectX in Object Pascal may be, are a problem especially in functional languages since most libraries are built with an imperative C-like interface.

If you like and know MFC already then using it is obviously good for you. I have just bad experiences with it and like I said I'm aiming for something of my own in this area. I don't want to limit myself to one OS either.

If we are lucky Robert Crandall might find time to elaborate what he has done with Flaspoint Germany? What I'm saying is that many many user interfaces can be done as forms in a designer without hand coding positions. I think using graphical editors, if possible, is a good way of doing user interfaces. In the end it might not matter. Might be that form designers are not popular with VC++ because it doesn't handle them as well as the Qt Designer, Delphi et al?

I mentioned the business world and business decisions which is what you have to do. I don't think JASL or VASL type hobby projects apply here. Also writing standard conforming C++ and using portable libraries isn't really more work than finding out how to do things in Windows. I know I make all my own stuff portable. I find it helps me to write better code too.

I mentioned destructors, stack allocation and the resource-acquisition-is-initalization idiom. I acknowledge the need for garbage collection in many cases but it is not always needed. However it would be stupid of me to say I can completely avoid memory leaks even though I pay attention. Lifetime management is not something that is needed for only memory allocation but also for database connections, remote resources, file handles etc.

Veldor

Iarth displayed your mistakes quite clearly. You made many bad remarks about Java without giving any good reasons or disclaimers. That sort of attitude is bad and creates false impressions. At least my reason for joining this thread was exactly that. Such baseless accusations I don't like. You were at least lazy enough not to write your reasons for us to read.

Your reasons seemed to be Java not being the preferred choice, Java being slow, Java being awful. First is a choice when you motivate yourself with "Nobody got fired for choosing Intel" etc. statements. That something is used a lot implies it might work, yes. Second is not quite the truth as I have explained. Third being a personal preference which you should've emphasized instead of mocking others. That is what I read from your posts.

You can freely call me a liar because I don't "borrow code". I use libraries with suitable licences but I would never just copy & paste code to my own. "Borrowing" is counterproductive. Ideas I do get from other people's implementation notes, research papers, books but never actual code. Usually the code is of such poor quality or in wrong language so it wouldn't do much good anyway. That's an unfortunate fact that code is often write-only. I'm not saying I can always do better code but I sure try (I'm someone who is genuinely interested in programming for programming sake instead of just it being an unfortunate tool to achieve something). I have heard first hand experiences that some businesses try to make money wrapping GPL code and selling that as their own. I guess that is why some companies like the BSD licence more because it's ok there . That's copyright at work too and I really respect it.

You obviously see your types of businesses that don't use Java. I see my types of businesses which do Java. I'm not trying to defend Java here because I find that language worse than C++ and the motivations are in my last post.

That DirectX can load X files or has "bells and whistles" has little effect in your game projects. In a small hobby project it might but it certainly does not make the game look better or more professional. Artists, user interface design and quality assurance do make better looking and more polished games and that's what you can get with money. Many hobby projects don't have large Q&A teams or thorough UI designs since those things are not always fun either but hard work so it's natural they don't get as much focus in voluntary projects. You can get most of the functionality with portable free libraries. They might not have as good documentation or interfaces as a commercial product but they are certainly usable with a higher risk and more suitable for hobby projects IMHO unless the goal is learning DirectX. If you want to get something done you will usually use something you have enough experience in.

Statements like Linux and Mac are irrelevant make it obvious why they stay like that because nobody is developing for them. I admit I have an old 98 dual-boot for games. I find it very hard to motivate an upgrade to XP because Debian GNU/Linux works so well. And mind you I don't want to spend my days debugging the kernel or such obscenities but demand my Linux to be easier to manage than a Windows system and it really is.

I did not clearly take a side because I didn't think I had to. I program both languages fluently and wanted to show some perspectives and technical sides into the issue instead of starting to accuse somebody else's thing. I don't think there being two similar products itself has any meaningful effect. If I look for analogies I get Falcon 4.0 with RPG group and eFalcon which might go either way. IE vs. Mozilla vs. Opera et al. or the same argument with operating systems is really a matter of diversity and some choice instead of monopoly. I have very bad experiences of monopolies.

Posts from larth have shown to me that the interoperability has been considered which is nice. Maybe it's a thing I picked up from the freedom of choice in Linux where I have several alternatives. I can see why somebody might fear fragmenting the community and doing a disservice but then again we already play and will play many different games of different periods because there is no single game that does it all. These are matters of opinion and everybody has one. Technical issues are not always and that was my agenda.

We can discuss whatever we want and we have many forums and many threads to do that . I think this thread has had some positive effect anyway.

larth

Your entrance to this thread brought some balancing opinions that were IMHO needed. I must note that I did visit your pages when Les first posted to this thread and I didn't find your reasons for selecting Java right either. I even contemplated mailing you. C++ is simply IMHO the better language (for my reasons you can see my previous post) but there may be some psychological issues that help productivity in Java. Also C++ is not near perfect either and currently closest to me stand functional languages such as Scheme.

There is a choice for Eclipse - NetBeans. However Emacs is so much faster than either of those (even with a fast machine) which is a bit disappointing. There is something hairy with threads in the JDK Swing implementation I gather. I haven't found a very good IDE for Linux yet. Maybe they will catch Visual Studio in a few years but there is certainly room there.

You don't have to change your quote because I'm pedantic .

Les

You post way too much . Your view, the user's view, however is very important and often neglected. Don't mind the programming stuff... if all goes well you should never need to know anything about the implementation of any program. The installation would either be clicking that program or running the "apt-get install asl" equivalent.

EDIT: fixed a couple typos

[Veldor]

Originally posted by larth

That was without anyone defending java.

Your right! I did state a bunch of times that "Java sucks" and so on. But so what? That's no different than Les' thread stating "Hearts of Iron sucks" or anyone else's statement anywhere. It's an opinion, and if you think its possible someone who knows little on the topic will just take my opinion for theirs (does that really ever happen???) then you should speak up and defend Java as I guess you have tried to do. Which is why we are talking about it. But no, it was not the purpose of this thread to state that Java sucks.

Thereafter you expressed your satisifaction with my "legal steps"

Yes this is and continues to be my prime objection as this sort of activity is "out of control" on all fronts, not just this area.

go into answering my questions there, then you go into my software experience (I have 25+ years of it from assemblers, to C and Java - what about you?)

Did I ever question that (quote it please)? All I remember ever was stating "surely you've been part of a larger development team". I don't want to reduce this to a comparison of credentials as even that is a debate in itself (I will if you really want). For instance quoting number of years is least relevant over say 10 years. And for instance it is said in the industry that "10 years of experience is not the same as 1 year of experience repeated 10 times". So its really more about where you have been and what you have done, your publication credits, industry training and certs, project references, etc. Why don't we just compare salaries and earthly possessions? I'm sure I'd win but that hardly says much by itself either. How bout Penis size?

These were not the reason for me using Java because they did not apply back then, but there are several reasons why Java is becomming more and more intresting as a games language

If you ignore my earlier "generic" statements about Java "sucking" aren't you saying what I am? That Java IS NOT the primary development tools used for Games TODAY??

The free tools available for java - such as eclipse and its plugins

Or google for "java ai" if you believe that area is neglected in java. I think the major item stopping more programmers from taking a look at java is that it is not common knowledge how much there is already available in and for java.

If you go to your local bookstore, you will most likely NOT find books about AI in JAVA, but you will find books about AI in C++ (My Borders had 3 and one more general AI book). If you look for professional training classes you'll find similar results. Even a search of Amazon will most likely not turn up AI Java books (haven't tried recently).

Now, don't let that make you think I am stating C++ is only better because of that. But Popularity in itself can have its advantages. Its the same reason why Microsoft products do so well. If 90% of people use a product that has 95% of the functionality of some other product, then in my opinion you are gaining more than you are losing by using that product.

Java and Linux go "hand in hand" from the mentality standpoint. That of "free" this or that. Oddly perhaps more should just start writing books and courseware if the community wishes to gain even more ground.

[Veldor]

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
It is well nigh possible, that a person that is a real programming genius, can out do a common person with a supposedly superior programming tool, whilst using a potentially inferior programming tool.

In that respect, it's not the programming tool that counts, but the person using it.

Les, you are more right than you know.

1) In the end what mostly matters is what the finished product is or looks like. Agreed.
2) The path (and resultant time to completion and finished quality) to the above is often based upon already available resources (Books or other publications, Training Classes, Example or Referecable Code, Peer Groups, Coworkers or associate help, etc.)
3) The ability to find in all of the above what is needed comes down to the individual programmers "resourcefullness".
4) The ability to develop or program in spite of a lack of #3 or inadequate amount of #2 comes down to an individual programmers "skill".

I consultant and teach on these types of overall issues alot. I can't see how anyone would disagree with those statements (please tell me if you don't). It is with those statements in mind that I do state and believe what I do. As C++ and DirectX and AI for games has much much more of #2 which is the second most important.

Fundamentaly that is why #2 is a higher priority than #3 or #4 (which is the person itself). If you are going to undertake a new project in corporate america why re-invent the wheel? If one approach has more of #2 out there than another you are ensuring a quicker and more successfull path in spite of #3 or #4. Though ideally you are getting the best of quality in all those as well.

So with all the time in the world and a ton of skill it doesn't much matter what you use. But that's not the parameters under which most of the world works (In fact its normally about the exact opposite.. No time and less skill).

[Veldor]

Originally posted by Mac
Might be that form designers are not popular with VC++ because it doesn't handle them as well as the Qt Designer, Delphi et al?

MS Visual C++ .NET Edition has a wonderful form designer for MFC apps whether your developing for .NET or not. I've always found it more than adequate for dragging and dropping and otherwise writing 99% of the code for me. Better tools out there sure but probably not better documented or as widely used ones.

Iarth displayed your mistakes quite clearly. You made many bad remarks about Java without giving any good reasons or disclaimers.

You are right but as you already pointed out its not a programming website so at that point in time it would have been just as uninterpretable as making a simple generic statement of opinion.

I also ALWAYS interpret anything posted by anyone automatically as personal opinion. As unless they state credentials to "speak" for some greater body I don't know them from anyone. As I didn't state my credentials, it should have been assumed it was all just my personal opinion and experience.

You can freely call me a liar because I don't "borrow code". I use libraries with suitable licences but I would never just copy & paste code to my own. "Borrowing" is counterproductive. Ideas I do get from other people's implementation notes, research papers, books but never actual code.

The problem with online forums is by the time you state all the if and or buts, exceptions, and ways of interpretation your post is 10 pages long. OF COURSE this is what I meant. Your taking my statement too literally. Many people do go so far as "copying code" others to at least "start out" by copying the code directly but all programmers at a bare minimum "reference" other code to base theirs on. Now that I think about it perhaps its better to say "borrow coding ideas" and "snippets" of code. Its never as easy as just plunking code down in your app and having it work, of course there is modification, minor or major.

I can see why somebody might fear fragmenting the community and doing a disservice....

VASL and JASL use the same graphics. If we are going to have two games why the same graphics? Lets go with both of them being written in Java as irrelevant. But as both are proponants of the "free" "open source" "sharing" mentality, why is JASL ignoring that nature which has been VASL from the start? It is a bit hypocritical to state those advantages of JAVA but then choose NOT to participate in the "open" project of VASL.

I think this thread has had some positive effect anyway.

I wonder if Larth would agree.

Your entrance to this thread brought some balancing opinions that were IMHO needed. I must note that I did visit your pages when Les first posted to this thread and I didn't find your reasons for selecting Java right either. I even contemplated mailing you. C++ is simply IMHO the better language...

Yes I read that before my post too and it sounded to me more like C++ was too hard for him to learn and that was the basis. You should at the very least obliterate that section Larth, if not rewrite it.

----

One thing I think hasn't helped in our "Debate" here is the fact that many of the statements are in reference to "commercial game" or "business" related development and many of the comments are in reference to "hobbyist" game development.

The two are vastly different and perhaps we each have a different one in mind when we are reading each others posts. JASL, as it stands, is right now a "hobbyist" freebie app. So the comments I've made about JAVA really aren't meant specifically for it though some of the counter-arguments have been. Then at the same time I have made comments about JASL and VASL themselves. This should probably be two seperate threads..

[larth]

Mac,

Originally posted by Mac
larth

Your entrance to this thread brought some balancing opinions that were IMHO needed. I must note that I did visit your pages when Les first posted to this thread and I didn't find your reasons for selecting Java right either. I even contemplated mailing you. C++ is simply IMHO the better language (for my reasons you can see my previous post) but there may be some psychological issues that help productivity in Java. Also C++ is not near perfect either and currently closest to me stand functional languages such as Scheme.

There is a choice for Eclipse - NetBeans. However Emacs is so much faster than either of those (even with a fast machine) which is a bit disappointing. There is something hairy with threads in the JDK Swing implementation I gather. I haven't found a very good IDE for Linux yet. Maybe they will catch Visual Studio in a few years but there is certainly room there.

You don't have to change your quote because I'm pedantic .

Thanks! I wont (yet).


As for C++ versus Java, it has been discussed in many places. I can only give you my view on why java makes my day. I did evaluate it when I did not get further with my ASL program using plain C. My top 10 are below - for examples assume standard ASL components . Note that I am not trying to convince you to swap, not likely if you do your own gui lib! Anyway, some of these may be present in C++ to, but I am unaware of it. There is a page at [2] which is linked from [1] describing the effort of rewriting a C++ work into java, which, depending on what you read in it may confirm all your opinions on java!

But as you say on C++, java is also not nearly perfect.

1. Garbage collector - no need to track normal use of new objects. It is very nice to be able to write functions that don't care what resources need to freed at that point. In C/C++ you need to know that at each return from a funtion, especially if you continue to allocate new memory after previous return()'s. No need to know if that if you do p_var = new array_type[size] in C++ you must free it with delete [] p_var. Just delete p_var will not do it.

2. Standard libraries - probably as big plus as 1. There are libraries for most of the (non-gaming) standard functions of programs and platform interfacing, which includes neworking, communications, opening and showing HTML pages directly, dialogues, 2D graphics operators, 3D since last year (IIRC). There such libraries also for C++, but there are several and using different coding standards and API's. In java this is unified out of the box. For others types of libraries there efforts like [3].

3. Stacktrace on exceptions - simple and nice to see where your program threw an exception and how you got there. The assert instruction added in 1.4. Can be enabled at runtime per class or for whole app or not at all.

4. What You See Is What You Run (tm) - when you look at particular piece of java code you can be sure there is no hidden calls via overloading! A = B + C means exactly that. This is an advantage when look for a bug because you know when you leave a particular method. A = B + C does never do that, in C++ unless you have it fresh in the head you have look in a different place / file to find out if you need to look deeper there.

5. No "undefined behaviour" or "platform dependent" which C++ has inherited from C together with inline assembler. Doesn't really belong inside a OO language.

6. Filenames correspond to class names. Could be done in C++ too I guess. Way cool when you are looking for that class again.

7. Tools for java - free and commercial. Favourites includes eclipse, RefactorIt (refactoring tool), Poseidon (UML editor), Jalopy (code formatter plugin for eclipse). I use these both on Linux and Win98.

Well, I will only manage a top seven now - it is half past four in the morning.


I love emacs. I used JBuilder for a long while in parallel with emacs + JDEE. There were several parts of the emacs / JDEE which are great (apart from being Emacs I mean!) but wasn't available in JBuilder, like automatic creation of Javadoc for classes and methods, auto indention of whole classes and so on. I used JBuilder for most trivial editing and switched to Emacs for more serious typing. Well, I stay mostly in eclipse now. I have no speed problems using my laptop (3 yrs old, 750 MHz, win 98). One do need 256 MB through. At point when I switched from JBuilder I could no longer debug using JBuilder due resource requirements, but I have no such problems in eclipse, even now with much more classes.

There seems to be splitted opinions on templates which are going to be added to Java as generics. I am not fan of these, or let us put it this way, I haven't missed them yet. While considering using C++ for my work I run into views on memory print and stability when using these and multiple inheritance [4], which also made me look more into java.

All in my opinion of course!

see you,
Lars



[1] http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/editorial-12.html

[2] http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/C++2java.html

[3] http://www.mind2machine.com/gb/openmind/index.php

[4] http://www.caravan.net/ec2plus/

[larth]

Originally posted by Veldor
I wonder if Larth would agree.

He would.

Yes I read that before my post too and it sounded to me more like C++ was too hard for him to learn and that was the basis.

No, I do not say that. C++ as a language is not much harder to learn that for example java. Please reread the FAQ in question more carefully.

As for the physical size of your equipment, unless your use of C++ has done something for it - I am not intrested...

regards,
Lars

[Veldor]

Originally posted by larth
Mac,
1. Garbage collector - etc

You don't seem to be too familiar with C++ especially Microsoft's .NET edition. I keep scratching my head at everything you say because .NET has all of this.

Makes it difficult to debate.

Let me just reference a single website. Its a .NET vs Java comparison and has two authors, one who takes each side. Its not the best written or the most in depth comparison, but I think it covers the major points on each side.

http://www.manning.com/dotnetbooks/java ... otnet.html

The "rebuttal" against Java is even more "on the mark" and shows the authors greater experience in the business marketplace and familiarity with both products.

http://www.manning.com/dotnetbooks/java ... uttals.htm

Ultimately which one you believe has a lot to do with personal experience in the industry. Microsoft has never failed thus far. And MS having 90% of the marketplace and all the $$$ in the world to go along is likely to change the playing field regardless of which is better.

If it were as simple as .NET vs JAVA maybe it could go either way.. But with .NET providing unified language support corporate america does love it in my experience. Its a matter of available talent and resources vs new talent and resources. There have always been more resources "people, product, books, classes, code, etc" in the non-java area...

Like you stated lots of companies dont have Java talent and "were" looking for it. With .NET you can reuse talent and resources you already have with similiar results.

This is what corporate america is educated to do by consultants like myself and consulting companies such as the one I work for. If it weren't me Microsoft goes in and does it themselves. There is no "JAVA Sales Force". .NET just makes sense. It's what corporate america needed most and lets face it Corporate America is really what drives the home marketplace which is what in turn drives game development. (The emergence of Windows XP being one example).

So I see no way for Java to win the battle. Clearly it has its devoted fans and followers, like anything. But I believe history has proven that that alone has never been enough.

[larth]

Originally posted by Veldor
You don't seem to be too familiar with C++ especially Microsoft's .NET edition. I keep scratching my head at everything you say because .NET has all of this.

Makes it difficult to debate.

Let me just reference a single website. Its a .NET vs Java comparison and has two authors, one who takes each side.

...

We were comparing C++ versus java and now you send us to a page comparing .NET (the platform) with java (the platform), no wonder it is hard to debate. Please stay on the topic.

Microsoft has never failed thus far.

Which planet are you from? Either we discuss this on merits or we are heading where I said. Arguments like 'MS is gonna win' is not really productive in this case.

regards,
Lars

P.S.: If java sucks so much as you believe why did C# turn out almost the same considering the time & research that went into it?

[Veldor]

Originally posted by larth
We were comparing C++ versus java and now you send us to a page comparing .NET (the platform) with java (the platform), no wonder it is hard to debate. Please stay on the topic.

.NET is the latest edition of C++ from Microsoft. It is released and people are already using it. What your doing is like trying to compare the latest version of Linux to Windows 98.

If your logic is so true, then I wonder lots of things like why every single game I buy seems to require DirectX (if for instance its of no use or concern in many games). Even the wargames I buy (including every single Matrix Game or ones I've looked at in production) use DirectX.

So clearly I must have just bought the only 50 games that use DirectX by the only companies that use non-java products to code it. Or perhaps the game boxes and websites are lying to us?

Perhaps you should get back to debate the original issue which wasn't which was better but that C++/DirectX is whats predominately used in the development of Commercial Games, by a landslide factor. Convince us all that it is really something else.

But since we are getting nowhere at all this lets just stop.

[Veldor]

Guys, I think we all need to start petitioning Matrix Games to release two versions of Combat Leader and each of their upcoming titles.

The first one should be just for PBEM and/or Network play.

The second would be for those that want to play against an AI. It would use the same graphics as the first but be coded from scratch so as to include and optimize the way the AI functions and would have a different interface than the first due to what is necessary for an AI.

This makes SO much sense I don't know why Matrix hadn't thought of releasing all their games in this format before.

Just like VASL and JASL.

THIS was one of the original concerns I had! This is on-topic. Similar but competing products can be good for each other (such as Combat Leader and PC ASL both being around) but two versions of the same game with the same graphics but different interfaces remains stupid.

[Mac_MatrixForum]

Veldor

I get the feeling you don't want to discuss the pros/cons of programming languages for various purposes but want to draw this discussion into corporate MS vs. the rest of the world -war. That's ok, I'll just shut up if you are not interested.

larth

I don't agree with all of your Java remarks but had you listed some in your FAQ I'd been more pleased . You seem to be the all too common C-programmer doing C++ case . Let me just say that abstractions is what programming (or any kind of useful formal notation) is about and creating programming languages is possibly the most powerful abstraction method and templates promise some of that. If C++ didn't have templates I'd have lost my interest years ago. Templates make it possible to do a level of meta-programming. It may be like what object oriented programming is in C (i.e. not pretty) but it sure has its uses. The impression I have of the Java generics is that they are nowhere near as powerful but that's something I'm not terribly interested about.

All

If you want to discuss some details, perhaps you have ICQ/AIM.

[Veldor]

Originally posted by Mac
Veldor

I get the feeling you don't want to discuss the pros/cons of programming languages for various purposes but want to draw this discussion into corporate MS vs. the rest of the world -war. That's ok, I'll just shut up if you are not interested.

Actually I'd rather be discussing the original purpose of this thread (Computerizing ASL), but perhaps I will just start another thread for that purpose soon.

Also its hard to debate when the other side is not very familiar with the product and languages you are advocating. This is all too common and I won't leave out the possibility that I am also not familiar with the absolute latest Java has to offer. I don't of course prefer it thus I'm far less likely to have used this or that addon or product feature than someone who is, and vica-versa.

As for the MS discussion, to me it is very much the same issue. The core philosophy behind most Java users and a majority of Linux ones is a "lets see how much we can do without the big bad Microsoft". Even the "respected" authors in the link I posted talk about that. While everyone else's efforts are on simply beating Microsofts, Microsoft is allowed a "focused" effort on enhancing all their products and the integration between them.

Business world aside, do you really think there is any real debate on whether to use C++ or Java for commercial games? I still stick to my original statement that it just isn't done very often (Java and/or non DirectX commercial games) and it would seem to me the only ones insisting on using Java for that purpose would be the "Use anything but Microsoft" types because there is far more lost than gained otherwise.

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

I am not sure that the thread has died out or lost it's purpose, but I would like to thank you guys for giving me a very good thread to read.

I think we can all agree, that the material has been interesting at the very least.

Some of the points have been a bit over my head, and most assuredly out of my reach. But it has been nice hearing the views. I think you guys all basically seem to know your materials.

I feel compelled to comment, that the computer industry is still fairly young. It has gone through a handful of distinct growth spurts if I am not mistaken.

I can recall my buddies dad fussing on a Vic 20 and thinking it was fairly cool. I remember the machines in highschool, and how there was always a rush at lunchtime to claim a machine just so we could play the most bland of games.
Then noticing how powerful a Commodore 64 seemed, and how life would magically become so much more cool if I could find a way to get one.
My own first computer was an IBM PS1 which I thought was a major item when I set it up. It was clearly so much more capable than some dumb ole pre 90's computer.

I got a 486 a few years after the 386, because the 386 was holding me back. Now I look at that machine sitting at my friends place (traded it for a washer dryer that is no longer here either), and realise how far down the food chain it is too.

I am still in debt for the very powerful 300MMX system I purchased, which I long ago upgraded to the point only the printer and this keyboard remain of the original purchase. 300 processor speed, I was positive nothing could ever be wrong with it.

Then my buddy insisted on my being able to run XP so I could do some light clerical work for him. XP made me upgrade. He was fairly frivolous with funds that christmas and my system ended up with an 800 celron and a heap o ram.

But today I sit here thinking, yes my sister could dump her P4 2 gig processor with the 60 gig drive on me when she finishes paying it off (claimed she was just going to buy a new more powerful one). Even if it is one of the useless Dell modules that can't be modified.
Trouble is, I would not be able to stick my dvd drive or cd burner drive or video card in it (say what you want, but Dell sucks when they make machines you can't open casually).

Ok by now you are wondering does Les have a point, and just what the hell is it

From start to finish, my life with computers has really only been 12-13 years. That is not really a very long time in some ways.
Compare that with other things, and it is possible to envision a future where computers could branch off in a zillion differing directions.

Computers are a combination of hardware tech and software tech. The hardware has gone amazingly far since I first started using one.
Somehow though, the software doesn't seem to have progressed the same amount.

I have gone from a 33 processor, to seeing a 2 gig processor as being atypical.
I have seen hard drives go from 200 megs, to 100 gigs.
Ram from 5 megs, to several hundreds of megs.
My friend just got a video card, that is actually faster than his main board processor. And it has more ram than I thought possible.

Software, well I once thought windows 3.1 was very user friendly. It sure made telling the computer things easier. Then we were given Win 95, and we no longer had to assume windows and dos were separate.
Games now have graphics, that actually can mimic visually the real thing, instead of granular images.

But has software really truely done anything extra special since (I have zero idea if it has).

I am waiting for interesting stuff myself.

Revolutionary would be my computer being able to imitate "thinking", not just following a predesigned check list process. I am completely unable to see what would be needed for that.
I think that it would be comparable to the creation of Windows though.

I think Java and C++ (and all the rest) will in time get relegated to being just "old stuff" from when the user had to input archaic looking code to make software do anything.

Maybe I am just dreaming.

Currently though, I am seeing the discussion here being in line with arguing what is best to write books with, an ink quill or a ball point gel tip pen or a pencil or a ball point Bic ink pen or an Erasermate.
Each one is incomparable to the ability to compose on a word processor for instance.

Our computer programmers need to start pushing the frontiers of what it is to program in ways undreamed of.

[Veldor]

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
But has software really truely done anything extra special since (I have zero idea if it has).

Advances in software and computing in general are responsible for the greatly heightened productivity in nearly ever business out there. The examples are too numerous to even list. "AI" may still be looked at as a failure for games, but in the business world it has met with much more success. Gone are the days of paying someone to research things, the "software" analyzes and makes intelligent decisions for you. One simple example being what sales your stores should run.

And that simple example wouldn't be possible if there weren't, in turn, software that could collect in real-time sales data from all your stores located throughout the US or even the world. And so on. Software has had a profound effect on how business is fundamentally even done, a hundred or thousand times over.

I am waiting for interesting stuff myself.

Perhaps for the home user, games remain the most "viable" and "visible" use for a home computer. But what about:

*TurboTax which now lets you do you taxes yourself.
*MS Money or Quicken to balance your checkbook and otherwise manage your finances yourself.
*Photo & Video Editing Software you can use yourself.
*Education Software to teach your children
*Home Automation for security, electric, and so on management.

And many many more...

Revolutionary would be my computer being able to imitate "thinking", not just following a predesigned check list process.

Depends upon the model used for AI. Chess-like programs and many wargames often use a "minimax" type model. It can be very effective, but in PC terms (or at least to AI guys) it really isnt true AI. Because the modern concept of AI requires other elements that that model could never incorporate. One somewhat extreme example when used in connection with game AI would be the ability for the AI to "learn". So that regardless of how good the AI is when you buy the game, it gets better as you play it. So your AI might be better than mine for the same game based on how much you play or what you did or didnt do when you did play. A truly "unique" and "skilled" opponent. It is and isn't hard at the same time (Ok its HARD).

I think Java and C++ (and all the rest) will in time get relegated to being just "old stuff" from when the user had to input archaic looking code to make software do anything.

Well perhaps from anyway we see or use them now, but more than likely the names will be caried on just as the "Windows" name will probably always exist for MS OS's. What your really talking about is whats called a "higher level language" the higher the level of language, the more like English it is, the lower the level the more like machine language it is (0's & 1's). Thats a bit over simplified but you get the point. There are reasons why higher level languages haven't overtaken lower level ones (for instance if there isn't a "word" for what you want in the higher level one, its not as easy to just create it as it would be in a lower level language).

But essentially those are obstacles that will definitely be eventually overcome. My own mostly unshared belief is that hardware and software is fine. Whats most deficient is the interface to the computer as it stands. Thats refering to the "monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc". Computing has moved beyond all of that but we are still stuck with all that. Monitors are still too small (I'm thinking Star Trek with your whole desk being a screen). Voice Recognition needs to be taken much further (the technology is there it's just not being "interfaced" right or implemented into software right. Other input devices exist or can be created.

At a very base level those are the most important elements of a computer as that is what you see and touch and how information is fed to the computer and returned from it. (For instance way way back when there was no monitor, just a printer and thats how the computer talked back to you). It needs to advance before other things will.

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

I liked your remarks with regards to interface Veldor, I agree, nothing much new has been done to link me to the computer beyond mouse and keyboard.

I think though you get a near miss on the first comments in your post though.

True computers have radically altered how a lot of things get done, but still, nothing about that option has changed much recently.

The only big major advance I have seen recently in computers vs the old way is with CGI actually.
In the last few years, as never before, computer applications have been able to make actors question their role or purpose especially stunt actors. Why take a risk, when you can just make it up on a computer.

Today's movies can deliver stunts and action scenes, that 10 years ago were a forget not possible prospect. Now, films have sequences that the viewer has a hard time determining the real from the image created on a computer.

In the business world, about all computers have done in a radical way, is allow cashiers to process goods without performing more than a casual pass in front of a scanner (it always gets interesting seeing staff handle power outages though).
The computer cash registers process incredible sums of useful data the office gets lots of milage from.

The current trend in airline travel might further promote the popularity of computer conferencing eliminating a need for business types to even travel in the first place. That might create a need for fast responsive software.

Hopefully the game world can get in on that technology for interactive wargaming.
Right now the scene for online wargaming doesn't overly impress me.
I can have fun playing solo on my machine here. But currently linking up two wargamers in real time on the internet is not something as easy to do as is assumed. That and I have heard enough grumbles about the security of the files while being exchanged between gamers.
It only takes one bad exerience with a questionable game, to completely destroy a person's faith in a game being worth it.

But I don't think software has done anything to immensely radical to business in a major new way recently.

Information media has certainly been affected though. This forum is a good example. When I began wargaming in the early 70's you found out about wargames by visiting the local game selling retailer. And that was it.

If you were lucky, the store had a new copy of magazines like the General or Dragon. I often found out about games only after they had been advertised in a wargame publication.
And I had the choice, buy the item off the shelf and determine if it was any good AFTER I had bought it.

Today the public can find out about a game while it is being designed and even impact how it will appear when finished by direct fan support input. And a game will live or die based on how it is recieved electronically.
Even board games are essentially now sold as an online function. MMP sells fine games, and there appears little if any point in looking for anything they sell on a retail shelf. Why expend the effort.

I currently have a subscription to Maclean's Magazine (Canada's new weekly). I have no intention of renewing it when it runs out though. The magazine appears in it's entirety online. Why wait for something in print when I can read it the second it is released on my computer.

[Veldor]

Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
I liked your remarks with regards to interface Veldor, I agree, nothing much new has been done to link me to the computer beyond mouse and keyboard.

I think though you get a near miss on the first comments in your post though.

I'm talking a bit beyond the cash register. Perhaps "Corporate America" would be a better term than "business".

I'm not sure how you can even comment on that aspect as I thought you made furniture or something of the sort.

There are numerous examples though of true "computer revolution" in Corporate America. Really, or I wouldn't be making what I do and the company I work for wouldn't be kept so busy.

How about the convergence of voice and data as just another example? The ability of computers and computer networks to completely 100% eliminate the need for traditional phone systems, phone lines, and so on. This has only come about in the last two years or so and is already sweaping through corporate america, even in the down economy, due to its tremendous cost advantages, feature advantages, and so on.

Cisco IP phones are like mini-computers. They have IP addresses and MAC addresses and plug into a CAT5 network jack hooked into the same ethernet switch that your pc is. You can go anywhere in the company, login to any phone, and instantly all your custom buttons are there, all your speed dials, all your lines re-routed there, etc. If you don't like the "physical" phone open up your pc app and you have a "soft" phone right there as well. Click a contact in outlook and your physical phone dials it automatically. Your voicemail shows up in outlook like an email, your email is read to you like voicemail when you call in. And thats just a few features of 100's gained.

But these are things the average person will never see, most will never even read about, but it is happening. Most advancements in computing don't come to the home user first, its always been that way...

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

"I'm not sure how you can even comment on that aspect as I thought you made furniture or something of the sort"

Understandable confusion Veldor hehe.

Yes a large swath of my work experience is in furniture (let me tell you after seeing what a computer can produce automatically with a laser it is sure unnerving competing with computers eh).

But alas I am A opinionated (no really I am heeh), and B I stick my nose into damned near every subject eventually (I read to much it seems).

But yes I suppose the corporate experiences might be a bit different than the more front end business employments of software concepts.

My sister is currently seeking access to her companies main system so she can make extra cash by just loggin on from home.

I think the world might become a lot smaller for those who are in a position to exploit the changes.

Actually the original reason I got my first computer was so I could write professionally and have a portal to the publishing world (sure beats the expense of submitting material in hard copy).