DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27

Thread: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?

  1. #1
    James Curran Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?

    Much of XP was written using C++, although I wouldn't be surprised if
    most of the kernel was Straight C or Assembler (Parts of the XP kernel go
    back to NT4 or older).

    About 3-4 years ago, I heard someone from Sun say they were doing their
    systems development in Java, but I haven't heard anyone else say that. But
    then, Java was never intended to be a systems language (exactly what it is
    targeted for has changed from time to time, but systems development has
    never been one of them)

    --
    Truth,
    James Curran
    www.NJTheater.com (Professional)
    www.NovelTheory.com (Personal)


    "Jey" <s_insights@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:3cd5a0b9$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > Is the XP kernal built from Java or C++? And, is it true that JAVA tech.
    > is the primary developmental tool these days as opposed to 3 months back?
    > I'm a C++ developer and I want to know if I'm going out of dated. :)





  2. #2
    Danny Kalev Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    Jey wrote:
    >
    > Is the XP kernal built from Java or C++?


    You gotta be kidding us, right? Think logically: if the kernel were
    written in Java, you would a need a JVM to RUN THE KERNEL's code. Now in
    order to run a JVM that would run the kernel, you'd need a kernel...
    I think this should clear all your doubts about the programming language
    of choice of *any* OS kernel in the current millennium. BTW, would MS be
    that dumb to use Java in their kernel when XP doesn't even support this
    language by default? And finally, why would anyone want to use Java as
    the programming language of an OS kernel when Java itself is implemented
    in C/C++? The truth is that XP's kernel, just as almost any other OS
    kernel written in the past 30 years, is written in C, with small
    portions of C++ and assembly (the OS/400 kernel is an exception. It's
    written mostly in C++, and it's one of the most reliable and fast
    kernels available today).

    > And, is it true that JAVA tech.
    > is the primary developmental tool these days as opposed to 3 months back?


    Man, you really have to switch to more reliable sources:) A serious
    survey would account for differences from one year to another. Do you
    really think that switching from one programming language to another
    happens so quickly (assuming that was a reason to do so in the first
    place, of course, which I highly doubt in this case)? That's pure,
    distilled nonsense, to put it mildly:) You can read the interview with
    Herb Sutter if you wish to know which programming language is in the
    lead, and why.
    http://www.devx.com/cplus/free/artic...02/dkhs2-1.asp

    > I'm a C++ developer and I want to know if I'm going out of dated. :)


    You could be going outdated if you don't invest time and efforts
    learning advanced and state-of-the-art C++. Again, check that interview.

    Danny

  3. #3
    Danny Kalev Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    James Curran wrote:
    >
    > Much of XP was written using C++, although I wouldn't be surprised if
    > most of the kernel was Straight C or Assembler (Parts of the XP kernel go
    > back to NT4 or older).
    >
    > About 3-4 years ago, I heard someone from Sun say they were doing their
    > systems development in Java, but I haven't heard anyone else say that.


    BTW, I wonder what ever happened to the highly touted MAJC chip that was
    supposed to run Java code natively. And does anyone remember the
    preposterous PICO Java chip?

    But
    > then, Java was never intended to be a systems language (exactly what it is
    > targeted for has changed from time to time, but systems development has
    > never been one of them)


    Well, it was intended to be the ultimate programming languages of
    toasters and microwave ovens. How could we ever toast bread without a
    Java applet running in the gutters of a toaster, beats me!

    Danny

  4. #4
    Jey Guest

    Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    Is the XP kernal built from Java or C++? And, is it true that JAVA tech.
    is the primary developmental tool these days as opposed to 3 months back?
    I'm a C++ developer and I want to know if I'm going out of dated. :)

    Jey

  5. #5
    Jey Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix of
    mocks here and there. :)


    So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice of
    languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen language
    for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications will
    still rule the Windows OS?

    Digitally,
    jey


  6. #6
    Kent Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    "Jey" <s_insights@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix

    of
    >mocks here and there. :)
    >
    >
    >So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    >the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    >I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice of
    >languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    >be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen

    language
    >for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications

    will
    >still rule the Windows OS?


    I'd agree with that, yes. I don't know much about .NET but I think some development
    for Windows will shift to this technology.

    Java, however, isn't really the language of choice when developing a platform-specific
    application. The major advantage of Java is its cross-platform nature (and,
    yes, this may include toasters - and, you would expect, coffee makers :-).

    Being both a Java and C++ programmer I can understand Danny's attitude towards
    those who think Java will one day rule the world - it simply can't exist
    without components and/or architecture built with another language. Moreover,
    that language is currently C. Java programmers who diss C are really dissing
    their own.

    >
    >Digitally,
    >jey
    >



  7. #7
    Danny Kalev Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    Jey wrote:
    >
    > Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix of
    > mocks here and there. :)
    >
    > So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    > the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    > I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice of
    > languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    > be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen language
    > for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications will
    > still rule the Windows OS?


    If you're aiming at Windows, Java is not an option. Microsoft doesn't
    and probably won't support it; the current JDK version supported by
    Visual Studio is JDK1.1, or 1.2. which are way outdated. Secondly,
    because of the political entanglement Java is involved with (that's why
    proprietary languages are always a bust), Microsoft has no reason to
    support or promote this language. C++ is still the language of choice
    for serious Windows development. C# may become a viable option in the
    future, when it matures and improves but again, it's only a veneer; it's
    underlying implementation is C/C++ so if you're considering performance
    as the most important criterion, there's only C++.

    Danny
    >
    > Digitally,
    > jey


  8. #8
    James Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    "Kent" <kb@essential.com.au> wrote:
    >
    >"Jey" <s_insights@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix

    >of
    >>mocks here and there. :)
    >>
    >>
    >>So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    >>the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    >>I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice of
    >>languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    >>be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen

    >language
    >>for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications

    >will
    >>still rule the Windows OS?

    >
    >I'd agree with that, yes. I don't know much about .NET but I think some

    development
    >for Windows will shift to this technology.
    >
    >Java, however, isn't really the language of choice when developing a platform-specific
    >application. The major advantage of Java is its cross-platform nature (and,
    >yes, this may include toasters - and, you would expect, coffee makers :-).
    >
    >Being both a Java and C++ programmer I can understand Danny's attitude towards
    >those who think Java will one day rule the world - it simply can't exist
    >without components and/or architecture built with another language. Moreover,
    >that language is currently C. Java programmers who diss C are really dissing
    >their own.


    And what about C? Built using what? Assembly Language. Which is itself built
    from native machine code.

    Swings and roundabouts.... :-)



    >>Digitally,
    >>jey
    >>

    >



  9. #9
    James Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    Danny Kalev <dannykk@inter.net.il> wrote:
    >
    >
    >Jey wrote:
    >>
    >> Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix

    of
    >> mocks here and there. :)
    >>
    >> So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    >> the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    >> I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice

    of
    >> languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    >> be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen

    language
    >> for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications

    will
    >> still rule the Windows OS?

    >
    >If you're aiming at Windows, Java is not an option. Microsoft doesn't
    >and probably won't support it; the current JDK version supported by
    >Visual Studio is JDK1.1, or 1.2. which are way outdated. Secondly,
    >because of the political entanglement Java is involved with (that's why
    >proprietary languages are always a bust), Microsoft has no reason to
    >support or promote this language. C++ is still the language of choice
    >for serious Windows development. C# may become a viable option in the
    >future, when it matures and improves but again, it's only a veneer; it's
    >underlying implementation is C/C++ so if you're considering performance
    >as the most important criterion, there's only C++.


    Not necessarily so, it all depends on the application and, more importantly,
    what exactly you mean by ‘performance’.

    >Danny
    >>
    >> Digitally,
    >> jey



  10. #10
    Danny Kalev Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    James wrote:
    >
    > Danny Kalev <dannykk@inter.net.il> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >Jey wrote:
    > >>
    > >> Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix

    > of
    > >> mocks here and there. :)
    > >>
    > >> So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    > >> the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    > >> I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice

    > of
    > >> languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    > >> be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen

    > language
    > >> for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications

    > will
    > >> still rule the Windows OS?

    > >
    > >If you're aiming at Windows, Java is not an option. Microsoft doesn't
    > >and probably won't support it; the current JDK version supported by
    > >Visual Studio is JDK1.1, or 1.2. which are way outdated. Secondly,
    > >because of the political entanglement Java is involved with (that's why
    > >proprietary languages are always a bust), Microsoft has no reason to
    > >support or promote this language. C++ is still the language of choice
    > >for serious Windows development. C# may become a viable option in the
    > >future, when it matures and improves but again, it's only a veneer; it's
    > >underlying implementation is C/C++ so if you're considering performance
    > >as the most important criterion, there's only C++.

    >
    > Not necessarily so, it all depends on the application and, more importantly,
    > what exactly you mean by ‘performance’.


    The answer to this is well-known. The very reasons that hinder vendors
    from using Java or C# as the programming language of an OS kernel can be
    summarized in "performance", whatever these may be: slow execution time,
    space demand, an extra level of indirection (i.e., the need to use a JVM
    or CLR), the lack of implementors ability to perform low-level memory
    and hardware I/O and so on. We're not discussing the philosophical
    definition of performance but rather the practical issues. After all,
    the fact that Java isn't used in OS kernels isn't due to a coincidence
    or bad luck.

    Danny

  11. #11
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    "Danny Kalev" <dannykk@inter.net.il> wrote in message
    news:3CDBE940.E94DDE1B@inter.net.il...

    > > Not necessarily so, it all depends on the application and, more

    importantly,
    > > what exactly you mean by 'performance'.

    >
    > The answer to this is well-known. The very reasons that hinder vendors
    > from using Java or C# as the programming language of an OS kernel can be
    > summarized in "performance", whatever these may be: slow execution time,
    > space demand, an extra level of indirection (i.e., the need to use a JVM
    > or CLR), the lack of implementors ability to perform low-level memory
    > and hardware I/O and so on.


    Most application do not have the same requirements for "performance" as do
    OS kernels.

    > We're not discussing the philosophical
    > definition of performance but rather the practical issues. After all,
    > the fact that Java isn't used in OS kernels isn't due to a coincidence
    > or bad luck.


    No. But not all Windows applications (or other OS apps) are OS kernels. Not
    all have stringent [soft] realtime performance constraints. There is such a
    thing as developer productivity and C/C++/Assembler suck big time in this
    respect. All the various languages represent a menu of tools -- choose the
    right one for the job you need to complete (e.g. C# would be a better choice
    for a data entry app and C/C++ for a realtime 3D game).

    Kunle



  12. #12
    Danny Kalev Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    "Kunle Odutola
    >
    > "Danny Kalev" <dannykk@inter.net.il> wrote in message
    > news:3CDBE940.E94DDE1B@inter.net.il...
    >
    > > > Not necessarily so, it all depends on the application and, more

    > importantly,
    > > > what exactly you mean by 'performance'.

    > >
    > > The answer to this is well-known. The very reasons that hinder vendors
    > > from using Java or C# as the programming language of an OS kernel can be
    > > summarized in "performance", whatever these may be: slow execution time,
    > > space demand, an extra level of indirection (i.e., the need to use a JVM
    > > or CLR), the lack of implementors ability to perform low-level memory
    > > and hardware I/O and so on.

    >
    > Most application do not have the same requirements for "performance" as do
    > OS kernels.


    Of course. But we *were* actually referring to an OS kernel, namely the
    XP kernel and why it wasn't written in Java.

    >
    > > We're not discussing the philosophical
    > > definition of performance but rather the practical issues. After all,
    > > the fact that Java isn't used in OS kernels isn't due to a coincidence
    > > or bad luck.

    >
    > No. But not all Windows applications (or other OS apps) are OS kernels. Not
    > all have stringent [soft] realtime performance constraints. There is such a
    > thing as developer productivity and C/C++/Assembler suck big time in this
    > respect. All the various languages represent a menu of tools -- choose the
    > right one for the job you need to complete (e.g. C# would be a better choice
    > for a data entry app and C/C++ for a realtime 3D game).


    Sure you can use other programming languages. As I said before,it makes
    no sense to write a C application that checks for passwords' expiry that
    requires hundreds of lines of code when a Perl script can do that task
    in less than 15 lines, especially when performance is not an issue.
    However, for time critical applications, be it soft or hard real-time,
    you wouldn't dream of using Perl, would you? As for C#, it's really too
    early to evaluate it. The language is still pretty buggy an immature.
    Java, after more than 7 years in the market, is only beginning to
    support assert, asynchronous I/O and other features that any serious,
    general purpose programming language should support. So this isn't just
    an issue of performance, but also language maturity. After all, what's
    the point in writing a Java application of which 50% of the code
    contains JNI calls to native C APIs?

    Danny

  13. #13
    NoMail Publisher Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    Simply look to an abstraction level.
    The base of chip are simply 0/1 signals.
    The nearest programming language for the chip is an machine-code.
    Next abstraction is assembler,
    Next ... C
    Next could be C++ because it is an comfortable C with new programming paradigm.
    Java ... sorry But I think there is no chip which interpret direcly Java
    without one of the abstraction levels before.

  14. #14
    Danny Kalev Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?



    NoMail Publisher wrote:
    >
    > Simply look to an abstraction level.
    > The base of chip are simply 0/1 signals.
    > The nearest programming language for the chip is an machine-code.
    > Next abstraction is assembler,
    > Next ... C
    > Next could be C++ because it is an comfortable C with new programming paradigm.
    > Java ... sorry But I think there is no chip which interpret direcly Java
    > without one of the abstraction levels before.


    Actually, there used to be one, the Pico-Java. You won't hear a word
    from Sun about it though because it was a disgrace. Quoting a Linux buff
    from one of the Linux forums I attend, "it performed like a three legged
    dog". So practically, you're right. There's no native Java chip, nor
    should there be one. The costs of developing such a chip and the poor
    performance that can be expected from it will nullify any economically
    wise investment in such a project. Then again, Sun has squandered
    billions in their attempt to push Java. No one can guarantee they won't
    try it once more...

    Danny

  15. #15
    blackspy Guest

    Re: Is XP built with C++ or JAVA?


    Java is not what's at the core of XP or any other OS, that's for sure. However,
    I think you may be thinking of the recent announcements from many university's
    that will no longer be using c++ to teach thier programming classes, but
    are switching to Java, this is true. Java allows you to focus more on the
    specifics of what you're trying to learn about while studying programming,
    and not having to worry so much about language. I doubt it though, that C/C++
    will continue to be the choice for writing applications for Windows. VB.NET,
    C# and Java are slowly but surely going to be the choice for writing stuff
    like that. The Windows core systems will no doubt be writtenn in C/C++/ASM,
    however much of the stuff on top of that, will likely be written in the languages
    I mentioned above. As for becoming outdated, I wouldn't worry about any specific
    language or tool, worry more about being able to learn/unlearn and relearn,
    technology changes so fast being able to learn new things and adapt to new
    ideas and tools is a better means of ensuring you're marketable for a long
    time to come.

    "Jey" <s_insights@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >Thank you for James and Danny even thought Danny's reply was with a mix

    of
    >mocks here and there. :)
    >
    >
    >So, from both of your professional opinion, I'm convinced that Java isn't
    >the core language in XP. And, Java isn't going to replace C++. The reason
    >I posed this question is that because I'm confused between the choice of
    >languges to develop some future windows applications. I know Java would
    >be a slow ***** because of JRE...so that only leaves C++ as the chosen

    language
    >for development. Would you two still agree that C++ based applications

    will
    >still rule the Windows OS?
    >
    >Digitally,
    >jey
    >



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center