Other Software > Announce Your Software/Service/Product

dot Net complaints

<< < (3/7) > >>

LangOver:
Hi,

JAVA us better?

I think you should take things in proportional....

Oded
http://LangOver.com

f0dder:
JAVA us better?-LangOver (October 25, 2010, 09:59 AM)
--- End quote ---
Nope :) (well, I don't know enough of the internals to say which environment has the upper hand head-to-head, but they use similar techniques). I'm in favor of .NET (for a lot of things), btw, if that didn't come across clearly enough :)

Could a moderator perhaps split out the whole stuff-about-.NET to a separate thread so it doesn't distract from LangOvers product announcement? - sorry for continuing the off-topicness :)

wraith808:
Could a moderator perhaps split out the whole stuff-about-.NET to a separate thread so it doesn't distract from LangOvers product announcement? - sorry for continuing the off-topicness :)
-f0dder (October 25, 2010, 10:18 AM)
--- End quote ---

I'll wait until this is done to continue discussion. :Thmbsup:

Update: Though since I had to post to say that, let me just say when I say appear to use more, I mean because memory is still allocated to the application that is not actually in use; when you dispose of objects, the memory is not freed immediately.  This can't rightly be said to be used by the application since the developer is not using the objects... the memory is still just in that application's space.

f0dder:
Could a moderator perhaps split out the whole stuff-about-.NET to a separate thread so it doesn't distract from LangOvers product announcement? - sorry for continuing the off-topicness :)
-f0dder (October 25, 2010, 10:18 AM)
--- End quote ---

I'll wait until this is done to continue discussion. :Thmbsup:-wraith808 (October 25, 2010, 11:29 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, if the topic is going to be split, this reply is also going with it, so... :)

Update: Though since I had to post to say that, let me just say when I say appear to use more, I mean because memory is still allocated to the application that is not actually in use; when you dispose of objects, the memory is not freed immediately.  This can't rightly be said to be used by the application since the developer is not using the objects... the memory is still just in that application's space.-wraith808 (October 25, 2010, 11:29 AM)
--- End quote ---
The application might not be 'using' the memory, but the thing that counts wrt. memory footprint is the Win32 Private Bytes size, not the amount of CLR memory. Keep in mind that even after GC has run, the win32 memory used by the CLR isn't necessarily reduced.

CWuestefeld:
well, .NET apps don't just appear to use more memory than an equivalent native app, they use more memory; one reason is the structure of the .NET library and the idioms around it
-f0dder (October 25, 2010, 09:50 AM)
--- End quote ---

That's not necessarily true, although it will be in many cases. There are a couple of things that can allow for more efficient memory usage.

For example, the immutability of strings allows the reuse of a single instance of a string value, without allocating multiple redundant values.

Also, the CLR design of generics is much more efficient than any other language/platform that I'm aware of. In some cases this can allow the source code to be much smaller. Basically, the definition of MyGeneric<MyClass> only needs to be stored once; whereas C++ for example must separately compile this for each different MyClass that's used.

In general, then, some kinds of programs will take more memory, and some may take less. But that's really comparing the same program, ported to different platforms. I'm betting that if you design your code from the ground up with an understanding of .Net (or whatever platform you're building for), you should be able to come up with a design that meshes well with whatever criteria are important to you.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page