Linked by Andy Roberts on Thu 19th May 2005 19:33 UTC
Java Swing comes with "pluggable look-and-feel technology", which essentially boils down to the fact that interfaces can be "skinned" (although this is simplifying a tad) and is therefore, extremely flexible. By default, Java ships with a cross-platform look-and-feel (LAF), which means your apps can look consistent across all platforms, or LAFs that mimic the look of a specific platform, say Windows, for example. However, one of the chief complaints of Java desktop applications is its "look". It basically stems from two issues:
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Well people, java is not slow.
Yes... it is!
Before you can run a Java app, you have to fire up the virtual machine. Then it's got to compile the thing as it goes. That means Java is, and will remain, slower than properly compiled languages.
And it's further crippled by it's constant bounds checking etc - which can be a lifesaver sometimes, true, but often is painful. Read John Carmack's comments on programming Java if you don't believe me.
In a lot of core OO tasks, java is even faster that C++!
Care to name any of these mysterious core tasks, or provide links?
In the end, it's not about subjective speed, but about efficiency.
Um yes? One thing Java is not is efficient.
C is efficient. You have to worry about array bounds and pointers and that sort of thing, but it is efficient because it doesn't do things it doesn't have to.
Whereas Java tries to do things for you, so it'll check if you're out of bounds of an array even if you know damn well you're never going to be.
And then there's the VM thing - Java is compiling as it goes, which imposes more overhead than if it's all done ahead of time.
So no, it is NOT efficient.