#Intellij idea vs qt creator manual#
#Intellij idea vs qt creator skin#

I suppose, however, that because I’m still using Java, that I believe it’s fast enough. To be fair, before I began looking into this, I had never thought that Java was the fastest language out there. Programs known to be memory intensive by nature, like scientific applications can in fact be limited by the JVMs conservative usage, and so many developers launch their Java apps with special JVM flags that permit Java to utilise additional memory. This means that by default a Java application won’t overwhelm your system and cause heavy swapping and other such nastiness. It’s worth being aware that the JVM by default doesn’t use all the available memory on a given system. There are other things you can do as a Java programmer to reduce the overhead such as using third-party libraries designed to be more efficient, such as fastutil or Javolution, which replace commonly used classes like the collections framework.

#Intellij idea vs qt creator manual#

If you want to partake in old-school manual memory-management then you can do a certain amount (such as dereferencing your objects and then explicitly calling the garbage collector), but nothing as low-level as what C programmers would be accustomed to. This is great for me, but not necessarily the most efficient way to manage memory. As a Java developer, I don’t need to manage my memory programmatically: I can leave it all to the garbage collector. When designing languages, you go either minimalist, and rely on the users to implement all the functionality they need or you go for the opposite, and provide an extremely rich language where developers can rapidly produce software. However, one man’s feature is another man’s bloat and I suppose this is where a lot of the debate stems from. The JVM and the Java runtime classes are feature packed. Yet, you must think about what you get for your money, so to speak.

A simple “Hello world!” class of say a kilobyte will still require the entire JVM, and the several megabytes that entails.

Object-orientated languages typically have a slightly larger memory footprint as you have to carry around a lot of information about all your objects currently initialised. I don’t believe that it is, so I’m not going to pretend. To be honest, even the most faithful Java evangelist would have trouble believing that Java is light on memory usage (relatively speaking, of course). It suggests to me that not all the criticism is entirely objective! This article aims to discuss some of the criticisms aimed at Java and see whether they are justified. Funnily enough, in my experience, many people who have commented to me, “Andy, I don’t like Java because it’s slow” are the very same people who use Perl/Python/PHP. The corollary being that Java on the desktop is infeasible for those without the patience of a saint. Coming under yet another two-pronged attack, you’ll typically hear complaints falling into the two camps:

#Intellij idea vs qt creator skin#

Following on from my previous article, the Java platform has an even greater image problem that is more than skin deep.