Java vs C and VB


[ ´ÙÀ½ ±Ûµé ] [ À̾ ±Û¿Ã¸®±â(´äÇϱâ) ] [ ÀÚ¹Ù ¹¯°í ´äÇϱâ ]

±Û¾´ÀÌ :Sung Yi 2000³â 2¿ù 08ÀÏ 07:01:43

In Reply to: À©µµ¿ìâÀ» ÃÖ´ëÈ­ ½ÃÅ°´Â ¹æ¹ý ¾Ë·ÁÁÖ¼¼¿©~ posted by Ýèç¯ on 2000³â 2¿ù 05ÀÏ 19:03:11:

Java vs C/C++


1. Syntax wise, the Java language is very similar to C (or should I say C++).


2. Java is typical object oriented language but C is not.


3. C is a middle level(or lower) language that deals with OS directly but Java is a much higher level language than C.


4. Java eliminates the complexity of C++ and has rich set of class libraries. Java does not have pointers and refereces (although internally it passes objects by references).


5. Both C and C++ are portable but not as portable as Java.


Java holds the future.



Java vs VB
VB is easy. Much easier to learn than Java.


It is not an OO language although it supports some of the characteristics of OO.


VB only runs on Windows and AS400 platforms but they(source and object code) are not compatiable.


Unlike PowerBuilder, VB is not good for developing large projects.


PowerBuilder is dying and I suspect that VB might as well be.


I don't completely agree but some says Java will replace VB.


VB is not open but Java is.


There are million things say about above topic but for the space and time being... so long



´ÙÀ½ ±Ûµé:



À̾ ±Û¿Ã¸®±â(´äÇϱâ)

À̸§:
E-Mail:
Á¦¸ñ:
³»¿ë:
HTML ÅÂ±× Æ÷ÇÔ ¿©ºÎ: HTML ¹®¼­ÀÏ °æ¿ì üũ
°ü·Ã URL(¼±ÅÃ):
URL Á¦¸ñ(¼±ÅÃ):
°ü·Ã À̹ÌÁö URL:


[ ´ÙÀ½ ±Ûµé ] [ À̾ ±Û¿Ã¸®±â(´äÇϱâ) ] [ ÀÚ¹Ù ¹¯°í ´äÇϱâ ]