maemo.org - Talk - Droid and Android gaming irony

Page 2 of 2

< Prev

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)

- Off Topic (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19)

- - Droid and Android gaming irony (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=34855)

sharper

2009-11-21 19:19

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by fms (Post 385446)

Well, C/C++ running on ARM is called C/C++. C/C++ running on x86 is still called C/C++. C/C++ running on 6502 is still C/C++. C/C++ without STDIO library is still called C/C++. C/C++ without STRING library is still C/C++. And so forth.

Why exactly is Java any different, aside from the bogus argument that "Sun defines it this way"?

Java is what Sun defines it to be. I think it's pretty funny to say "Oh only Sun defines it that way" because what you're saying is you're making up your own definition for what Java is and using that. You can certainly say Android is a lot like Java but one area where it's not at all like Java is runtime performance, since that's the topic under discussion it's important to highlight the distinction.

If I took C++ sourcecode, compiled it to Java bytecode and automatically rewrote the interface calls to be java platform calls then nobody would say that was C++. In particular nobody would be so bloody minded as to run a performance test on that setup and say "Wow the performance of C++ sure does suck doesn't it?".

The simple fact is Android is not Java.

406NotAcceptable

2009-11-21 19:29

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rushmore (Post 385202)

Ironically, the G1's KB is better than Droids. N900 appears to have both the same key alignment and lack of top row clearance that Droid has.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharper (Post 385364)

Android applications are written in the Java language syntax yes but they don't use the Java platform or run as Java on the phone.

Google also makes a toolkit that lets you write javascript applications as Java. That's not "Java" either, that's a Java framework that lets you write javascript/ecmascript.

Android just uses a different JVM, it is a Java derivative. You can use some standard Java libraries. I would say it is Java, but it is like comparing J2SE to J2ME.

I didn't know the JVM lacked JIT, I would've thought it would really speed up Android.

Not sure if I hate Dalvik or J2ME more! J2ME is like using Java 1.4, no Generics, no Collections, no foreach loops, etc. Whilst I am forced to use crummy Eclipse for Dalvik :( So I am glad to be leaving the platform!

sharper

2009-11-21 19:47

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by 406NotAcceptable (Post 385489)

Android just uses a different JVM, it is a Java derivative. You can use some standard Java libraries. I would say it is Java, but it is like comparing J2SE to J2ME.

The differences between J2ME and J2SE are the platform libraries and the language features supported by the JVMs. Android doesn't use the platform library at all, uses its own non-standard VM and uses non-standard bytecode.

The Android VM won't run Java code and the Java VM won't run Android code.

fms	2009-11-21 19:47

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharper (Post 385479)

Java is what Sun defines it to be.

Ok. So, you have no valid technical argument here, just a legal one, provided to you by Sun?

Quote:

You can certainly say Android is a lot like Java but one area where it's not at all like Java is runtime performance, since that's the topic under discussion it's important to highlight the distinction.

You may find it news that a lot of JVMs use interpretation rather than JIT. For example, Sun's own KVM (used in MIDP1/MIDP2 reference implementations and in many cheap cellphones) is an interpreter. I have no idea what makes you think that Java is limited to JITs. This is not even in Sun's definition of Java, AFAIK.

Quote:

If I took C++ sourcecode, compiled it to Java bytecode and automatically rewrote the interface calls to be java platform calls then nobody would say that was C++.

It would still be C++ though. In fact, Microsoft does just that with "managed C++" inside Visual Studio .NET. And yes, the performance would suck, but it does not make it any less C++.

Rushmore

2009-11-21 20:59

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by 406NotAcceptable (Post 385489)

Never understood any review that said the Droid's keyboard was better than the G1s. Shallow flat keys v raised keys, a no brainer really! The Droid's 'chin' is smaller, but the stupid D-Pag position is like having two chins on a G1.

Android just uses a different JVM, it is a Java derivative. You can use some standard Java libraries. I would say it is Java, but it is like comparing J2SE to J2ME.

I didn't know the JVM lacked JIT, I would've thought it would really speed up Android.

Not sure if I hate Dalvik or J2ME more! J2ME is like using Java 1.4, no Generics, no Collections, no foreach loops, etc. Whilst I am forced to use crummy Eclipse for Dalvik :( So I am glad to be leaving the platform!

More playable at least for me. The current alignment makes going from left to right awkward unless you map the keys next to each other and then diagonals are unintuitive and up/down too, since you either are lined up with left or right. Even a standard KB has a slight stagger. Seems both Droid and N900 waste space that could have been a better KB. Droid's was a rush job (two blank keys and poor d-pad are a clue to this) and I know that Nokia thought it would be more ergonomic. For typing- yes, but not for games.

G1 has a better (IMO) key orientation for emulators and more space on the top row. Still we are talking reservoir dogs here, since the G1 keyboard is not that good either-just a tad better for games. Everything is relative.

sharper

2009-11-21 21:10

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by fms (Post 385507)

Ok. So, you have no valid technical argument here, just a legal one, provided to you by Sun?

I've outlined extensively the technical argument for why Android is not Java, What is "Java" and what is "not Java" is defined by Sun. This not a "legal" argument but a "what words mean" argument. You want to pretend you can simply decide what is and is not Java based on your own reasoning without reference to how the word is used by everyone else. When something is "Java" it means the three things I outlined above. Android is missing two of those.

You've also ignored the other example I gave. If a toolkit takes Java source code and produces ecmascript/javascript from it does that mean ecmascript/javascript is now "Java" too? Of course not.

Quote:

have no idea what makes you think that Java is limited to JITs

I have clearly stated Java is not limited to JITs just that it's an extremely important factor in the performance comparison. Number people have been saying "Java is slow" based on their experience with Android.

Quote:

It would still be C++ though. In fact, Microsoft does just that with "managed C++" inside Visual Studio .NET. And yes, the performance would suck, but it does not make it any less C++.

You source code would be C++ syntax nothing more. Your compiled code in that example is the .NET platform. Considering the limitations placed upon managed C++ code in .NET it's not "really" C++ but there are fewer restrictions on what can be called C++ than Java.

fms	2009-11-21 21:23

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by sharper (Post 385586)

What is "Java" and what is "not Java" is defined by Sun.

If Sun lawyers would like to think that, it is no problem to the rest of us. Yet, any language that uses Java syntax and semantics, not adding or removing anything, is effectively Java.

Quote:

If a toolkit takes Java source code and produces ecmascript/javascript from it does that mean ecmascript/javascript is now "Java" too? Of course not.

Well, then the toolkit you are describing can be called a "Java to JavaScript translator". Other such translators exist. For example, there is a well known Fortran to C translator (F2C). Also, early C++ compilers were simply translating C++ code into C, for later compilation with C compiler.

Quote:

Java is slow even outside Android, but let us return to what you have said peviously:

Quote:

You can certainly say Android is a lot like Java but one area where it's not at all like Java is runtime performance

In other words, are you claiming that any JVM (including all the interpreting JVMs) that is not fast enough is "not Java"? And how fast is "enough"?

Quote:

You source code would be C++ syntax nothing more. Your compiled code in that example is the .NET platform.

My source code is in C++. It makes absolutely no difference what syntax the compiled code is in: ARM, x86, 6502, CLR, Java bytecode, Dalvik bytecode, C, or JavaScript.

Bratag

2009-11-21 21:33

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rushmore (Post 385359)

Bratag made a great camera app for the G1 that made the camera usable. Droid users could sure use you because the camera app SUCKS. I wonder if it really is a software issue or really hardware (crappy camera components).

He can tell us the overhead horrors of Android. Bratag, please take a deeeep breath before explaining and stay away from the whiskey (Android probably drove him to drink) ;)

I would love to make one for the droid - just as soon as I figure out all the camera parameters motorola for some reason decided to rename from standard and also figure out why when they call the hardware take picture function they decided to close the goddamn camera device - forcing me to reaquire it every mfing shot.

Honestly Android is on a slippery slope which will be paved with every manufacturer doing their own goddamn thing.

I wont even get into why my app doesnt work on the HTC Hero, they apparently decided that noone would want to generate a view in code and add it to their main layout so they just didint bother to implement code in the OS to handle that situation - sure it gave them a small (and perhaps faster) layout handler - but of course completely fubared my app and dozens of others that like to add objects to the view programatically.

Bratag

2009-11-21 21:41

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

If Sun lawyers would like to think that, it is no problem to the rest of us. Yet, any language that uses Java syntax and semantics, not adding or removing anything, is effectively Java.

Ok I feel I have to step in here. That statement is patently bollocks. The syntax and semantics of a language do not denote it "being" that language - the interpreter of that syntax and semantics are what define that. It is entirely possible you could write an interpreter for the Java syntax etc that in no way produced the same output as the Java interpreter. By the same token you could adapt the Java interpreter to handle a non Java syntax.

While I agree that the syntax etc of a language play a role in defining it - they do not maketh the language in the whole.

Finally - To legally call something Java compliant you do have to get sign off from Sun. Anything else is technically not Java compliant and thus not "really" Java.

sharper

2009-11-21 21:49

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by fms (Post 385601)

My source code is in C++. It makes absolutely no difference what syntax the compiled code is in: ARM, x86, 6502, CLR, Java bytecode, Dalvik bytecode, C, or JavaScript.

With Java it does because Java is a platform in addition to being a language. That's the aspect you're simultaneous ignoring and dismissing as a "legal" argument.

Considering we're talking about runtime performance and the runtime aspect is the area that Android most differs from Java it's wholly inappropriate to make comparisons on that basis.

Now I have no particular desire to crap up this thread further. I was making a small clarification for a poster who was referencing Java performance metrics in relation to Android. If you want to continue calling Android Java go ahead but you'll be continually misunderstood in what you're saying.

Edit: Thank you Bratag I think you outlined it all much more succinctly than I was able to. Sometimes I'm confused why discussions like this are even necessary, I generally assume people are just not aware of certain information and they just need to be pointed to it, when they actually start to disagree with established fact it all becomes a bit surreal.

v13	2009-11-21 22:18

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by fms (Post 385446)

C++ (and C) (in contrast with Java) are very well defined. C++ is exactly the ISO/IEC 14882:2003 and that includes the string library (section 21 of the standard).

Java on the the other hand... well...

So please, don't compare those two (three) languages. Java is just a product that a company defines while C++ is a standard. There is no limitation on what you can do with C++ and even the oldest C++ programs still compile and run. Java OTOH has a great number of limitations and questioned backward compatibility.

Of course C beats' em all on those aspects :D

Bratag

2009-11-21 22:32

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by v13 (Post 385633)

Excellent post. Thanks mate.

Rushmore

2009-11-21 22:55

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Well, when all is said and done:

Since Droid does a great job with emulators but can't play Quake 1 very well due to the overhead, my guess is the N900 will kick Droid's a55 for emulators.

Quake 1 is weak to a stuttery mess on Droid. Quake 3 seems to play smooth with sound on the n900.

Strange about Droid, since my Dell Axim played Quake 1 pretty good with sound.

v13	2009-11-21 22:57

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by 406NotAcceptable (Post 385175)

Java really isn't as slow as many would make you believe.

http://kano.net/javabench/
http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer...benchmark.html

Certain operations can be slightly faster, whilst others are upto 10% slower.

Both sites seem like FUD to me.

The first site doesn't compare the languages at all. It just compares different algorithms: The java's algorithm and the author's algorithm for each example.

For god's sake, who allocates a matrix that will hold integers in C++ like this (matrix.cpp):

Code:

int **mkmatrix(int rows, int cols) {

    int i, j, count = 1;

    int **m = (int **) malloc(rows * sizeof(int *));

    for (i=0; i<rows; i++) {

        m[i] = (int *) malloc(cols * sizeof(int));

        for (j=0; j<cols; j++) {

            m[i][j] = count++;

        }

    }

    return(m);

}

Not only he could just have done:

Code:

return malloc(rows*cols*sizeof(int))

and accomplish a N-times faster program, he uses malloc instead of new in a C++ program.

As for the second site, writing something like this:

Quote:

Pointers make optimization hard

makes me stop reading (why mention pointers when talking about C++? where are your references?). But I continued:

Quote:

Garbage collection- is it worse...or better?
....
Consider what happens when you do a new/malloc: a) the allocator looks for an empty slot of the right size, then returns you a pointer. b) This pointer is pointing to some fairly random place.
With GC, a) the allocator doesn't need to look for memory, it knows where it is,
....
The big benefit of GC is memory locality. Because newly allocated memory is adjacent to the memory recently used, it is more likely to already be in the cache.

at this point the author compares the internal memory allocating method of the c library with the C (and C++) language. That's totally wrong and can be proved by looking at glibc and montern operating systems: glibc used not to free memory at all but instead re-use it (what the author wants) but that was changed and now it lets the kernel manage the memory more efficient. In fact, since all memory is virtual (and most of the time it is split in 4KB pages), there is no guarantee that two consecutive memory addresses will in fact be consecutive (or in cache). Of course, all these are operating system dependent and the OS tries to do its best. Java just builds a layer on top of this.

OK, Java's speed is acceptable, but the sites should have more serious claims...

p.s. I could keep commenting on almost all lines of those sites for hours, but you get the point :D

sharper

2009-11-21 22:58

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rushmore (Post 385664)

Since Droid does a great job with emulators but can't play Quake 1 very well due to the overhead, my guess is the N900 will kick Droid's a55 for emulators.

Certainly right now any application that needs to run close to the wire will benefit from being run on the N900.

It's not just a matter of performance but also the availability of hardware services. I remember reading an article a couple of years ago that said researchers loved working with Nokia phones versus other manufacturer's because they provided the best access to things like the DSP.

Rushmore

2009-11-21 23:00

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by v13 (Post 385667)

Code:

int **mkmatrix(int rows, int cols) {

    int i, j, count = 1;

    int **m = (int **) malloc(rows * sizeof(int *));

    for (i=0; i<rows; i++) {

        m[i] = (int *) malloc(cols * sizeof(int));

        for (j=0; j<cols; j++) {

            m[i][j] = count++;

        }

    }

    return(m);

}

Not only he could just have done:

Code:

return malloc(rows*cols*sizeof(int))

and accomplish a 1000-times faster program, he uses malloc instead of new in a C++ program.

As for the second site, writing something like this:

makes me stop reading (why mention pointers when talking about C++? where are your references?). But I continued:

at this point the author compares the internal memory allocating method of the c library with the C (and C++) language. That's totally wrong and can be proved by looking at glibc and montern operating systems: glibc used not to free memory at all but instead re-use it (what the author wants) but that was changed and now it lets the kernel manage the memory more efficient. In fact, since all memory is virtual (and most of the time it is split in 4KB pages), there is no guarantee that two consecutive memory addresses will in fact be consecutive (or in cache). Of course, all these are operating system dependent and the OS tries to do its best. Java just builds a layer on top of this.

OK, Java's speed is acceptable, but the sites should have more serious claims...

p.s. I could keep commenting on almost all lines of those sites for hours, but you get the point :D

Hey, you seem to know your stuff- want to make a Turbografx emulator for the n900? ;) Galaga 90 and Blazing Lazers are religious experiences :)

xymor

2009-11-22 01:52

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Dalvik isn't Java but it uses the same languages and several java libraries are compatible, for instance popular Apache commons-httpclient. And since Android doesn't claim to be java compatible any library could refuse to work.

Given the resemblances I'd say Android is as much Java as Google Application Engine is. Not everything java will run in it but it's similar enough so developers can use their java development infrastructure, knowledge and work around the discrepancies/limitations.

And android now has a jit.

fms	2009-11-22 07:37

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bratag (Post 385611)

The syntax and semantics of a language do not denote it "being" that language - the interpreter of that syntax and semantics are what define that.

Not really. There are multiple interpreters of BASIC for example. There are multiple C/C++ compilers. And so forth.

Quote:

It is entirely possible you could write an interpreter for the Java syntax etc that in no way produced the same output as the Java interpreter.

I am not sure what you mean by "interpreter output" here. But if two interpreters execute the same Java program producing different outputs, that would mean that at least one of them violates Java semantics.

Quote:

Finally - To legally call something Java compliant you do have to get sign off from Sun. Anything else is technically not Java compliant and thus not "really" Java.

And here we go invoking Sun lawyers again...

v13	2009-11-22 13:03

Re: Droid and Android gaming irony

Just show this.

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:02.

Page 2 of 2

< Prev

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

vBulletin® Version 3.8.8