How to explain an analog state variable filter ..

[Tony Hardie-Bick]

I tip my hat to any language that is Turing-complete.

Tony (HB)

James Coplin <james at ticalun.net> wrote:

>The simple fact that you can write a java compiler in c and a c
>compiler in java means they are necessarily computationally equivalent.
>
>James R. Coplin
>
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Peter Korsten <peter at severity-one.com>
>Sent: October 14, 2011 9:45 AM
>To: Music-bar <music-bar at lists.music-bar.org>
>Subject: Re: How to explain an analog state variable filter ..
>
>Op 14-10-2011 13:36, Martin Naef schreef:
>
>> The problem of C and C++ is that you can shoot yourself in the foot.
>The
>> strength of C and C++ is that con can shoot yourself in the foot if
>> there's a good reason.
>
>Yeah, trying doing BER decoding with unsigned integers and without 
>mmap()... for this sort of thing, Java is useless, and it's something
>we 
>actually need at work. So that I wrote in C.
>
>> Look, what you're saying is totally true in the enterprise world.
>When
>> it comes to the embedded world, things look quite differently. I
>haven't
>> heard of any real-time Java implementations, at least none that are
>> truly out in the field. Or to give another server / desktop example:
>> High-performance math or signal processing libraries. Until you
>exploit
>> vector instructions, you'll always lose massively. For those
>> applications, you're back to C++.
>
>True, but correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd say those are relatively 
>straightforward applications. Data in, run some computations, data out.
>
>You probably don't have to worry if halfway through your TCP/IP 
>connection suddenly goes AWOL, or try to prevent hack attacks.
>
>What you're saying I mentioned, too: that you don't want to use Java
>for 
>high-performance computational tasks, and I wouldn't want to rewrite 
>something like Source or CryEngine in it either. But for an awful lot
>of 
>applications, Java's performance is good enough, and its added 
>advantages make it compelling to use.
>
>Oh, and as for embedded systems, would you consider a blu-ray player 
>embedded? :) Actually, Java runs on an awful lot of systems. Real-time 
>it may not be, but embedded, I'd say it certainly is.
>
>> Does any of that apply to you? Probably not. Does it apply to me (and
>> lots of developers in my company)? Yes.
>>
>> There's a place for many different languages. There's absolutely no
>> place for "language X sucks", unless you specify what exact problem
>> you're trying to solve.
>
>Ah, but I don't think that C++ sucks, per se. It sucks for the vast 
>m
>
>[The entire original message is not included]
>_______________________________________________
>music-bar mailing list
>music-bar at lists.music-bar.org
>http://lists.music-bar.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/music-bar