fry wrote on Nov 29th, 2006, 3:10pm:primitive types are kept separate because objects have significantly more overhead than primitive types. but this is problematic when storing primitive types because java's hashmap et al require objects so that the values can be passed by reference.
if everything in java were objects (presumably how ruby treats things) then it would be too slow for interactive graphics. i don't know if ruby has done something clever, but my guess is that ruby is too slow for the type of work for which processing is designed. or at least the pixel flipping sort of things, as its speed is probably more on par with python or ecma/action/javascript.
You raise the correct point that primitives are more efficient and less computationally expensive than pure OO, but the topic itself is an interesting avenue that I think will become more important as time goes on.
[rant]
Despite the inherent computational benefits of using primitives, I am inclined to believe that as Moore's law continues to hold for modern processors, the value in most programming will stem from development time rather than initial performance benefits. Ruby does well in being expressive, elegant, and very logical, which lends itself to manifesting working models of whatever you happen to envision within a program.
With Ruby 2.0 to increase its speed tremendously with a new VM, and with the ability to streamline functional components with C code, I predict Ruby, and it's kind (Python, Perl, Lua, etc.) will gain more footing in this sort of graphically intensive application. Projects like NodeBox http://www.nodebox.net/ are encouraging examples of this sort of thing.
If nothing else, maybe we will all reach a compromise when JRuby development matures, and it gets fast enough to use for intensive applications.
[/rant]
Pages: 1
Map, HashMap etc. (Read 2396 times)