DaWei

...write once, test everywhere, write some more....

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

ReggaetonKing

Really? I highly doubt that you really could. Also, I suggest you really look more into Java's features and then look at Visual BASIC's features. Don't rely on what your friends tell you.
I have never had a problem running Java applications on my different machines.

__________________
I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code!

DaWei

I'm sure you represent a complete, or at least representative, cross-section of machines in the industry .

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

ReggaetonKing

@DaWei: If you say so, lol.

__________________
I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code!

Arevos

Sure, in the same way that both a sharp rock and a chainsaw can cut down a tree. That doesn't mean there aren't advantages to using the chainsaw over the rock, and I suspect that is what reggaeton_king meant by "power".

That said, as I understand it, VB.NET's featureset isn't dissimilar to Java. Only when you're dealing with old school VB do problems start to surface.

Mad_guy

Well, I'd say that more has to do with features rather than actual computation power in this instance. They have equivilant power (at least if you look at it from a theoretical point of view, such as turing machines), like I said, each has features that facilitate the process of doing what you do, I'd rather say that Java might have more advanced features in some respects, but not a greater amount of overall 'computation power.'

Well, you really can.

It's one thing to listen to what your friends say, and a completely different thing to listen what has been shown for over half a century. Like I said, look into turing completeness, in fact, if you doubt that you could write any INTERCAL equivilant program of, say, Java, look at Wikipedia, it addresses that statement. Java, and INTERCAL (no matter how odd and esoteric it is,) are both turing-complete (as with many mainstream languages,) if you look at them that way, they all have an equal amount of power. Features are quite different from overall the amount of power.

__________________
os: mac os 10.5.4
revision control: git
editor: emacs

site

DaWei

I suspect you may be confusing the definitions of 'power' and 'ability'.

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers

Arevos

When one talks about how powerful a particular language is, it's usually with respect to how quickly or efficiently you can solve problems with it. Talking about what computations it can achieve is meaningless; as you so neatly pointed out, any Turing-complete language can emulate any other. Thus, if I say, "Java is more powerful than Visual Basic", what I mean is, "Java is a more suitable solution to a wider range of problems than Visual Basic is".

uman

Just to nitpick, it's certainly not true that any Turing-complete language can emulate any other. Any Turing-complete language can compute anything that can be computed by any other Turing-complete language, but that doesn't mean that they are likewise equivalent in areas not related to computation. For example, it's impossible to write a graphical program in standard C++ (all graphics libraries for C++ are non-standard extensions) while it's trivial to do in Visual Basic. Both languages are Turing-complete.

__________________
Few people deserve to be compared to (Rush) Limbaugh, most of them were convicted at the Nuremburg trials.
--WilliamSChips on Slashdot

DaWei

Bullshit. It isn't impossible to write a graphical program in standard C++. The fact that existing graphics libraries are extensions and not part of the standard libraries does not mean that they are not written in standard C++ (though they may not be). Defining the limitations of a distinct set does not automatically impose those limitations on non-members.

If that's not emulation, I don't know what is. I also don't quite understand why you imply that graphics programming isn't "computation."

__________________
Abstraction doesn't make it impossible to write bad code; it makes it possible to write superior code.
Contributor's Corner: Grumpy on C++ Exceptions DaWei on Pointers