>
> 6.  Hardware is getting so fast that I'm not sure if the performance
> difference between Java and C/C++ are relevant any more.
When out-of-the-box parsing & transform of XML in java is 25x slower than
C++ on the same hardware then it does matter.

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA1A444160
	for <zzzz@localhost>; Mon,  2 Sep 2002 11:22:03 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for zzzz@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 02 Sep 2002 16:22:03 +0100 (IST)
from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
    (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g826juZ22846 for <zzzz@spamassassin.taint.org>;
    Mon, 2 Sep 2002 07:45:56 +0100
from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
    with ESMTP id 7006C294183; Sun,  1 Sep 2002 23:43:02 -0700 (PDT)
from hotmail.com (f98.law15.hotmail.com [64.4.23.98]) by
    xent.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C3F8294099 for <fork@xent.com>;
    Sun,  1 Sep 2002 23:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
    Sun, 1 Sep 2002 23:44:26 -0700
from 216.30.74.2 by lw15fd.law15.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;
    Mon, 02 Sep 2002 06:44:25 GMT
From fork-admin@xent.com  Mon Sep  2 16:22:33 2002

Adam Beberg:
>Considering 90% of the fake job posting I see are for embedded systems or
>device drivers - C still rules the world.
There is a lot of C++ in the embedded world. With
static object allocation and a few other programming
techniques, performance differences disappear, but
C++ gives a boost in development and maintainability.
The real issue is compiler availability. Almost every
embedded platform has C cross-compilers. Many have
C++ compilers. But there is still a range of
platforms that have the first but not the second. Or
at least, that was the story a few years ago.
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E7C47C74
	for <zzzz@localhost>; Mon,  2 Sep 2002 07:42:03 -0400 (EDT)
from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for zzzz@localhost (single-drop); Mon, 02 Sep 2002 12:42:03 +0100 (IST)
from lugh.tuatha.org (root@lugh.tuatha.org [194.125.145.45]) by
    dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g827VJZ23920 for
    <zzzz-ilug@spamassassin.taint.org>; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 08:31:19 +0100
from lugh (root@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lugh.tuatha.org
    (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA22561; Mon, 2 Sep 2002 08:30:44 +0100
from moe.jinny.ie (homer.jinny.ie [193.120.171.3]) by
    lugh.tuatha.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA22526 for <ilug@linux.ie>;
    Mon, 2 Sep 2002 08:30:36 +0100
lugh.tuatha.org: Host homer.jinny.ie
    [193.120.171.3] claimed to be moe.jinny.ie
from jlooney.jinny.ie (fw.jinny.ie [193.120.171.2]) by
    moe.jinny.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F9167FC40 for <ilug@linux.ie>;
    Mon,  2 Sep 2002 08:30:35 +0100 (IST)
by jlooney.jinny.ie (Postfix, from userid 500) id 58AA19A5;
    Mon,  2 Sep 2002 08:30:58 +0100 (IST)
From ilug-admin@linux.ie  Mon Sep  2 13:14:12 2002