Go to Post It is great to be proud of the way you do things, but to imply that everyone should match your way of thinking, is ludicrous. - JVN [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Programming
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-04-2010, 00:20
Radical Pi Radical Pi is offline
Putting the Jumper in the Bumper
AKA: Ian Thompson
FRC #0639 (Code Red Robotics)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 655
Radical Pi has a spectacular aura aboutRadical Pi has a spectacular aura aboutRadical Pi has a spectacular aura about
Re: PROGRAMMERS: WIND RIVER C++ vs LABVIEW vs JAVA

We have 2 programmers (including me), both of us were already fluent in C++ when we joined the team, so there was no argument over what language to use. I have done a fair amount of work in LabVIEW though (dashboard, some NXT programming before I discovered NXC), and I still prefer C++ and other text-based languages too.

On the argument over which language is better, I'd still have to go with C-style. In terms of useability, LabVIEW winds (it's by far the easiest to pick up), however in the more technical aspects it starts to fail. Have you ever looked at a disassembly of a LabVIEW program? I have (for NXT), and it does not look very good. I compared it side-by-side to a disassembly of an NXC program that does the exact same thing, and, even on a VM specifically designed for LabVIEW, the C code is so much simpler. The problem? No optimization. Lots of messy things show up in the LabVIEW that are just totally unnecssary for the operation of a simple program.

This of course, is not meant as a disrespect to LabVIEW. I'd imagine that during the switch from ASM to C there was the exact same argument of asm being so much more efficient than the C equivalents. What made the final difference? We figured out how to optimize the assembly so that the advanced structures of C took as little code as possible, and now it is super-hard to outperform C code in asm and still get a great program.

LabVIEW certainly has a future. It just needs that same time to mature and be able to match the output of the more established languages. Simple numbers can show this need. Earlier in the topic, I saw people talking about ~3 minute builds and downloads for LabVIEW. In C, I don't think I've clocked a full build and download in more than 45 seconds. Usually much less (on a pentium III to boot). Give LabVIEW time to become a high-performance language. Maybe not for the current generation of programmers, but give it 20 years, and I wouldn't be surprised to find dataflow languages creeping into our game engines (assumming the GNU guys get their hands on the language. It's a bit too pricey at the moment)
__________________

"To have no errors would be life without meaning. No strugle, no joy"
"A network is only as strong as it's weakest linksys"
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wind River Cds Team1710 C/C++ 0 22-09-2009 10:57
Uninstall Wind River Lord_Jeremy C/C++ 0 15-01-2009 15:56
SVN wind river Mr.Macdonald C/C++ 3 13-01-2009 12:40
Wind River Help BenB Programming 3 02-01-2009 21:42
Open Wind River excel2474 Programming 12 31-12-2008 17:36


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:49.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi