Before I dive into the lower levels of the sea...

Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 2006.11
Post: #1
I have begun learning Java. It will be a stepping stone for me into ObjC or C++ or D (haven't decided... leaving that till finished learning some Java)
OneSadCookie said "1.4, Not 1.5" somewhere. Why??
Also, before I fully commit... How long does it take to write a small program where you can click on a image, click on another point on the monitor, and the image will rotate, then accelerate, then rotate 180, decelerate and land on the point you've clicked?

I want to know the advantages of lower level languages like C++/Java/ObjC over higher level languages like BlitzMax... Is there ANY advantages? BlitzMax kinda solved the cross-platform thing. And I realise that with a high level language you can accomplish things in... perhaps 10% as much time as a language like C++.

In the two and a bit months I was in TNTBasic (from learning to draw text on the screen to this month), I have managed to finish the skeletons of an RTS (along with all the code-generated GUI elements and the Units and Buildings), minus producing the units (which will be done when I scurry another couple of hours from my Java practicing time (that was what i was doing in the physics thread i created in another part of the forum)....Blush ).

From my extremely limited experience with C++, I highly doubt this can be done by a one-man team in this short amount of time. (less than 60 hours.) But... there must be some advantages to C++ that I am missing... Yes, TNTBasic has its problems, but thats why you use BlitzBasic, which doesn't have those problems and can still have almost just as fast development time...

BlitzMax or Java, Now? (Or is using BlitzMax a stepping stone instead a better choice?)

Thanks in advance.
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,403
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #2
why do you limit yourself to such restrictive languages like C++ or ObjC ?

Sir, e^iπ + 1 = 0, hence God exists; reply!
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,560
Joined: 2003.10
Post: #3
Lower-level languages (the C family) give you several advantages. Namely, unbeatable speed, and the full power of the system API at your fingertips. Some things will probably take longer to implement, but I find myself wrestling with higher-level langauges just as much as C when I try to write a real application in them. It's a different set of problems, but overall not necessarily any easier or harder.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 2006.11
Post: #4
Quote:why do you limit yourself to such restrictive languages like C++ or ObjC ?
Any other suggestions? Wink
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #5
I said Java 1.4 is a good language to learn first, because it's simple. Java 1.5 is nearly as complicated as C++, so much less helpful as a starting language. If you're already familiar with programming, there's probably no harm at all in jumping straight into Java 1.5.

If you choose a high-level language, things are *much* easier to get done, but (particularly with games) you can spend a lot of the time that you gain from greater productivity, trying to gain back some speed in critical areas. Personally, I think that trade is well worthwhile.
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 529
Joined: 2003.03
Post: #6
leRiCl Wrote:BlitzMax or Java, Now? (Or is using BlitzMax a stepping stone instead a better choice?)

Speed-wise, BlitzMax is excellent. Its OOP features are somewhat limited (no operator overloading or constructors for example,) but otherwise its fine for game programming.

If you run into a feature it lacks, you can always extend it with your favorite flavor of C. Even I managed it, and I'm hardly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

OTOH, Java is free...

"Yes, well, that's the sort of blinkered, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage."
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 2006.11
Post: #7
Changed course.... Now I find C looking easier than Java and even BlitxMax. Maybe I could move into Objective-C...

Hmm, What would I do to program a game in C? I can't use OpenGL, that's c++... Use Quartz? XD. I have no idea...
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,403
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #8
Quote:OpenGL, that's c++

Where did you get this information from?

Sir, e^iπ + 1 = 0, hence God exists; reply!
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,560
Joined: 2003.10
Post: #9
OpenGL is a C API.

In addition to OpenGL, you'll also need some sort of API for creating a window and an OpenGL context, and some other miscellaneous things your game will need to do. Some of your more prominent C API choices would be GLUT, Carbon, or SDL. With a little bit of Objective-C, you could also use the Cocoa API.
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,482
Joined: 2002.09
Post: #10
GLUT is a very easy place to start if you want to work with OpenGL. OneSadCookie's GLUT Tutorial

Scott Lembcke - Howling Moon Software
Author of Chipmunk Physics - A fast and simple rigid body physics library in C.
Quote this message in a reply
Sage
Posts: 1,403
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #11

Sir, e^iπ + 1 = 0, hence God exists; reply!
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 2006.11
Post: #12
unknown Wrote:Where did you get this information from?
I asked google a question "What is OpenGL written in?" and it told me "OpenGL++ — ... was intended to be a powerful layer above the OpenGL 3D graphics system written in C++".

I suppose you could have projects with different languages at once. But I think curently it is more like a C++ API from what I've read on the internet, to me. Blush
Quote this message in a reply
Moderator
Posts: 1,140
Joined: 2005.07
Post: #13
OpenGL++ was a C++ layer of OpenGL, but has been dead for a while. (info) OpenGL itself is very much a C API.
Quote this message in a reply
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 2006.11
Post: #14
Skorche Wrote:GLUT is a very easy place to start if you want to work with OpenGL. OneSadCookie's GLUT Tutorial

Hmm, I went exploring in the IRC world, and people told me to look at http://freeglut.sourceforge.net/docs/api.php, to expand my knowledge.

But, this is freeglut, not glut, is this alright??
Quote this message in a reply
Luminary
Posts: 5,143
Joined: 2002.04
Post: #15
freeglut is a free implementation of the GLUT API. In other words, there is no meaningful difference.
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply