[Novalug] small, tight lower overhead footprint?

Brander Snaxe brandon20va@yahoo.com
Fri Oct 19 14:07:24 EDT 2012


What about using Qt framework with C++?

Qt is more than just a GUI framework. It is a whole application framework. I've been learning it recently for developing apps on my Nokia N900. It's pretty sweet. Never done C++ before (I'm a java guy by day), but it is quite enjoyable.

________________________________
From: Ed James <edward.james@gmail.com>
To: Novalug <novalug@calypso.tux.org> 
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 5:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Novalug] small, tight lower overhead footprint?

I've become very partial to C++ on my Linux boxen.  The executable
is far smaller than an 'terp version will have, if you count the 'terp.
And despite claims to the contrary, I doubt that any 'terp language
executes faster than compiled C++.  I've heard such claims from
Java people repeatedly, but I'm pretty experienced in both, and I've
always found my C++ versions way faster.

C++ does have some execution overhead compared to C, but it's
never been a problem.  Compilers keep getting smarter about optimizing

A downside is that C++ stuff isn't particularly portable between
OS's if you do any GUI work (compared to Java, etc).  I code
straight to xlib (X Window system), so my code isn't particularly
Microsoft-friendly.

Another downside is that I"m spending a lot of time just building
the GUI widgets (Frames, Menubars, Text Areas, Scroll bars, etc)
than just using what's available to 'terp systems.  But the toolkit
stuff is reusable, so projects gets done quicker and quicker.  There's
overhead coding time here that a business probably won't want to
spend.

Part of your decision, then, depends on your interface.  Do you need
a GUI interface, or do you need just code cranking away out-of-sight?

Ed James

On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Mark Smith <mark@winksmith.com> wrote:
> i'm not against ruby.  how does it compare in size and performance with
> other languages?  if it does something extremely powerful that might
> translate into expensive.
>
> for instance, i didn't indicate java as a good choice.  you can do a
> great many things in java, but small, tigher lower overhead footprint,
> i would call it not.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 07:12:40PM -0400, Geoff McNamara wrote:
>> Ruby - but I am biased - very biased .... it takes just a bit to get
>> over the ruby initial basics - then once it clicks that *everything*
>> is an object - then it becomes a gentle breeze.
>>
>> The String object in ruby is very powerful and flexible.
>> Ruby can be installed anywhere and the code is cross platform in the
>> same way perl or python is.
...
_______________________________________________
Novalug mailing list
Novalug@calypso.tux.org
http://calypso.tux.org/mailman/listinfo/novalug



More information about the Novalug mailing list