Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

Which does your team use, Java or C++?
I have searched through these forums and google for this answer and it is very wishy washy.

If you want leave why you use it but vote for either.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

You forgot Labview.

(I'm not on a team, except as an alum, so I can't answer... but I would guess that you'll get a pretty even split between the three.)

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

Java. Our school teaches Computer Science in Java, so naturally the programming team liked the idea of using Java to program the robot, since we didn't already have a base in Labview or C++ anyway (2010 team). Though I ended up being the only programmer in the end... so Java definitely was a good choice because I'd hate to be programming a robot solo in a language I'm not already familiar with.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

C++. We've had 2 new programmers doing all of the work since the new control system came out and we're both already competent in C++, so we stick with that

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

LabVIEW is an irrelevant language here!

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

C++ I find Java to be a language that is similar to C++ but with traning wheels

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

How is it irrelevant? It is a programing language with the same, if not more potential than the other programing languages. Our team uses LabView.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

If I had to choose between C++ and Java, I would choose C++ for robot programming:

1. The gigantic advantage Java has over C++ is that it can make pretty GUI's. However, that is completely useless in cRio programming as there is no GUI interface.

2. This year, Java was on its first year and C++ was on its second, however the old control system has been using C since 2004. C/C++ is much more proven and tested in FRC robotics as of now then Java.

3. I already know C++. I don't already know Java. I also know and like LabVIEW.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

You sir make a very good point.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

The makers of the cRIO would probably disagree about that. The FPGA (the part that does all the "real work") is programmed using LabVIEW. So is the provided FRC dashboard application.

For what it's worth, Team 45 uses neither C++ nor Java.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

I apologize for disregarding LabVIEW. Wasn't my focus.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

1. Trust me when I say that Java is *much* more capable than that. Desktop Java, as in version 1.6 with standard libraries is considerably more capable than vanilla C++. Even with the limited version you get on the cRIO (Java 1.3 with J2ME libraries) you can still do plenty. I have plenty of examples if you'd like ;).

2. With a new and different environment (the cRIO) you can hardly call it 'proven'. The (completely) new C libraries only have a year's head start on their Java equivalent, and having used both, I can say that both work very well.

3. A valid point, but I'd certainly recommend you give it a try- in most cases the syntax is identical or even simpler than a C/++ equivalent so the learning curve is actually quite small.

That doesn't make it good. Trust me when I say that's one of the most inefficient programs I've seen in a long time. I honestly feel bad for the processor on our XO laptop while it (the dashboard) is running- the CPU usage shoots up to 100% rendering something that should barely take any CPU at all.

My opinion on LabVIEW: It may make coding convenient or easy, but that doesn't make it better than other tools.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

As much as I like C++, Netbeans was an easier IDE to use.
Some of the things that made it easier were:
- Integrated Netconsole, Serial comms without a long cord, (connecting to the remote server never worked for us)
- Automatic reboot on download, when not using the debug mode, this saved lots of time
- Automatic file uploader, uploads the correct program file without going to a configuration page even when changing projects

Though, it seemed that there was a memory leak somewhere which would limit us in how many times we could upload / minutes open before we would have to restart netbeans.

And library support was a little lacking this year.
Only the vision libraries that were needed to get the vision tracking were ported.
To access any other parts of the NIvision libraries, JNA (Java Native Access) was required, (Writing a method in C++, compiling it in windriver, and then uploading it)

CAN support for the closed loop modes (current, position, speed) for java was the last language implemented, with a gap between Labview and C++.

But, even without all of the libraries, Java was perfectly capable language for programming the cRIO, and FRC robots.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

My biggest complaint with Java on the cRIO is that they ported a non-realtime version of Java, instead of a realtime version.

Re: Java VS C++ || The Final Decision
 

I would be overjoyed to use C++ for robot programming,
IF THEY TOOK THE TIME TO MAKE IT COMPILABLE FROM LINUX, FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST ITS GCC

edit:

Wow, i was angry.

could someone please <code> a makeFile from the C++ stuff? I think I can get C++ working on linux if i have a makefile.