<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The basics of &#8230; Java</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/</link>
	<description>Software development wisdom and common-sense for the scientist-programmer</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:47:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: R Darkins</title>
		<link>http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/comment-page-1/#comment-504</link>
		<dc:creator>R Darkins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 16:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=485#comment-504</guid>
		<description>@P Warnes, Java does not allocate 4 bytes for all primitives (although it does allocate an entire byte for booleans).

With regards to speed, well-written Java code generally isn&#039;t much slower than C++ from version 5 up. The main bottleneck, in my experience, is with the maths functionality - particularly trig - but this can often be circumvented with the use of precomputed lookup tables.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@P Warnes, Java does not allocate 4 bytes for all primitives (although it does allocate an entire byte for booleans).</p>
<p>With regards to speed, well-written Java code generally isn&#8217;t much slower than C++ from version 5 up. The main bottleneck, in my experience, is with the maths functionality &#8211; particularly trig &#8211; but this can often be circumvented with the use of precomputed lookup tables.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Let&#8217;s note about Java &#171; Bekhongdeokinh&#8217;s Blog</title>
		<link>http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/comment-page-1/#comment-339</link>
		<dc:creator>Let&#8217;s note about Java &#171; Bekhongdeokinh&#8217;s Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Jul 2009 20:15:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=485#comment-339</guid>
		<description>[...] to basic Java introduction for scientist, go no further than Programming for Scientists blog. This blog provides much more than this basic introduction. It also has some interesting [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to basic Java introduction for scientist, go no further than Programming for Scientists blog. This blog provides much more than this basic introduction. It also has some interesting [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/comment-page-1/#comment-266</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2009 03:10:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=485#comment-266</guid>
		<description>Great article series, nicely done. Minor nitpick though.. 

&quot;Java is a much purer object-oriented language than C++ as everything must be an object.&quot;

The second half of this sentence is a bit misleading, as Java does have &#039;primitives&#039; which are not objects. This is in contrast to other OO languages, like Ruby for example, where everything truly is an object.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article series, nicely done. Minor nitpick though.. </p>
<p>&#8220;Java is a much purer object-oriented language than C++ as everything must be an object.&#8221;</p>
<p>The second half of this sentence is a bit misleading, as Java does have &#8216;primitives&#8217; which are not objects. This is in contrast to other OO languages, like Ruby for example, where everything truly is an object.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: P Warnes</title>
		<link>http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/comment-page-1/#comment-262</link>
		<dc:creator>P Warnes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 20:14:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=485#comment-262</guid>
		<description>On &quot;means that more memory must be used to store values&quot;, I think Java allocates the same size of memory (4 byes) for when you use a boolean, byte, short, and int.  It just restricts what the range is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On &#8220;means that more memory must be used to store values&#8221;, I think Java allocates the same size of memory (4 byes) for when you use a boolean, byte, short, and int.  It just restricts what the range is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dalloliogm</title>
		<link>http://www.programming4scientists.com/2009/03/23/the-basics-of-java/comment-page-1/#comment-256</link>
		<dc:creator>dalloliogm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 22:45:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.programming4scientists.com/?p=485#comment-256</guid>
		<description>Very nice article, thanks.
If I may add, you could cite something about the state of libraries for bioinformatics in Java, e.g. BioJava, libraries for statistics and plotting.

I have considered learning Java at some point, but the fact is that it seems harder to learn and with not immediate advantages compared, for example, to python.
I like the python syntax for object oriented programming a lot, since it is easy, has good support for tests and documentation, and it is very easy to read.

I don&#039;t know if Java is better for this than python, but it seems a too much verbose language.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very nice article, thanks.<br />
If I may add, you could cite something about the state of libraries for bioinformatics in Java, e.g. BioJava, libraries for statistics and plotting.</p>
<p>I have considered learning Java at some point, but the fact is that it seems harder to learn and with not immediate advantages compared, for example, to python.<br />
I like the python syntax for object oriented programming a lot, since it is easy, has good support for tests and documentation, and it is very easy to read.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t know if Java is better for this than python, but it seems a too much verbose language.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

