Java to C++ to C

eXodus · Post by **eXodus** » Fri Feb 04, 2005 5:06 am

I followed a 3 years formation at my local college. We extensively studied Java and I consider myself an experienced developper with this language.

Actually I've been studying Irrlicht for a couple of months so I had to learn C++. The deeper I get into it, the more I tend to code in C.

On top of that, I DO prefer C to Java and I recently found out that the newly open-sourced Quake3 engine is in C.

So, besides me and John Carmack

, am I the only OO Java coder to prefer C

mispunt · Post by **mispunt** » Fri Feb 04, 2005 8:38 am

I have to use Java for school now, but I didn't use it so much as c++, So I prefer c++ above Java And above c.

Robomaniac · Post by **Robomaniac** » Fri Feb 04, 2005 5:46 pm

In short:

- Java is bad for games and graphics apps
- Camack used C in Quake3 by habit (it was what he's used to)
- He used C++ in Doom3
- C++ is great

eXodus · Post by **eXodus** » Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:19 pm

I should have specified that I rely alot on OO programming. But the more I learn about C the more I tend to make good use of its concepts in my otherwise OO projects.

disanti · Post by **disanti** » Sat Feb 05, 2005 2:39 am

I've tried Java and C#, and IMHO, I think that C++ is a lot cleaner and easier to understand. C is fun too, but not for big projects.
________
Honda Super Cub specifications

AssiDragon · Post by **AssiDragon** » Sun Feb 06, 2005 12:08 am

Depends on your habits and on the project you need. Sometimes C can be a bit more effective, and many things I do in my project rather reminds of of C than OO programming. That said, C++ and OO programming is a great thing, just use it wisely.

I don't really like JAVA though.

jirr · Post by **jirr** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:19 am

Programming depends on your habits. You can do anything in any language (more or less). And Java is not that bad - you can even use a Java-Binding for irrlicht and get fps far above 300.

Just my two cents ...

Murphy · Post by **Murphy** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:01 am

eXodus wrote:On top of that, I DO prefer C to Java and I recently found out that the newly open-sourced Quake3 engine is in C.

Did the Q3 engine source get released? Carmack delayed it, and I didn't think it had happened yet.

As for why the Q3 engine is in C... Q3 is based on Q2 which is based on Q1, which was written in C and QuakeC in like 1995. C++ wasn't the same language then. It wasn't nearly as popular. Good compilers were harder to come by. Carmack already had experience writing similar games in C. The QuakeC language wasn't OO, and making it OO (C++ like) and efficient would have been much more work. If you think the QuakeC argument isn't relevant, I assure you it is -- a lot of the C code in Q2 is pretty much exactly QuakeC code from Q1. I'm just saying there are a lot of practical reasons for Q3 to have been in C rather than C++ which don't have that much to do with the merits of the languages.

As for my preference, I find things to love and (mostly) hate about all programming languages. Of the ones you list, I'd say I like C++. While I don't agree with a lot of C++isms, it can do everything C can (at least for reasonable definitions of 'everything'

). And even if I don't like everything about it, the addition of templates alone is a big improvement. Forcing sloppy coders to be more explicit with their casts is too.

afecelis · Post by **afecelis** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:12 am

Carmack didn't release Q3 open source after all; check his site:
http://www.armadilloaerospace.com/n.x/johnc/recent updates/archive?news_id=290

edited: the link has a weird space in the middle that breaks it, please follow this google search link:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=& ... tnG=Search

I intended to release the Q3 source under the GPL by the end of 2004, but we had another large technology licensing deal go through, and it would be poor form to make the source public a few months after a company paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for full rights to it. True, being public under the GPL isn't the same as having a royalty free license without the need to disclose the source, but I'm pretty sure there would be some hard feelings.

arrrrrggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!

Murphy · Post by **Murphy** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:15 am

afecelis wrote:Carmack didn't release Q3 open source after all; check his site:

Yeah, that's what I thought.

I'm sure we'll have it by the end of this year, though, which will be nice. There's a couple really simple things it'd be nice to have fixed.

afecelis · Post by **afecelis** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 9:20 am

no doubt you would've improved it Murphy! Your GI-lightmapping knowledge is overwhelming!!!

niko · Post by **niko** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 11:50 am

Unfair that C# is together with Java in that poll. C# is my favorite language. Java sucks. So I voted for C++

LordNaikon · Post by **LordNaikon** » Sat Feb 19, 2005 6:38 pm

why do i get forced to learn java at school ? does sun hava a contract with some schools, so the pupil have to learn it ? because nobody whant to use it and sun has spend to much mony to abort java and the only way to save it is to force us to use it ?

my pref. is c++ and maybe in further times c#

besides:

my ide msvc++6 in now 7 years old but "the horse gallops" without problems. should i update to a newer version like 2003 with .net ... is there any compatibility problem when i use this with msvc++6.0 projekts ... or ain't there any prblems ... i have a little fear "never tuoch a running system"

Irrlicht Engine

Java to C++ to C

What is your preferred language?

Java to C++ to C

Re: Java to C++ to C