PureBasic Forums - English

TI-994A wrote:And as I've said, we've established that the underlying JavaScript engine for this new version is different.

"New version" of what? Do you have some evidence the two projects are related?

TI-994A wrote:The JavaScript code runs atop an embedded Rhino/V8 Engine which acts as an interpreter to the Java environment. It is not compiled to Dalvik bytecode.

And if your aunt had bollocks she'd be your uncle.

TI-994A wrote:Rendering his post pointless; as always.

You really are full of wit.

the.weavster wrote:This:

TI-994A wrote:The JavaScript code runs atop an embedded Rhino Engine which acts as an interpreter to the Java environment. It is not compiled to Dalvik bytecode.

is incorrect.

Please stop trolling around. Bottom line is, you'd claimed that the statement is incorrect without a foot to stand on. And related or not, the two DroidScripts work in the same way, regardless of the JavaScript engine being used.

the.weavster wrote:You really are full of wit.

The one true statement you've made in a long while.

TI-994A wrote:Please stop trolling around. Bottom line is, you'd claimed that the statement is incorrect without a foot to stand on.

Your vanity is both laughable and absurd. You're so far up your own flue pipe you just can't admit you're wrong.

TI-994A wrote:And related or not, the two DroidScripts work in the same way, regardless of the JavaScript engine being used.

Hours of desperate Googling turned up nothing to suggest the two projects were related then? Wrong again, huh?

the.weavster wrote:Hours of desperate Googling turned up nothing to suggest the two projects were related then?

Hours!? It seems that you've been hard at work.

You seem to be under the impression that I have a need to prove that the two are related. Well, I don't. I've clearly stated that I believe that the current version is a fork of the original version. Whether it is or not, is no skin off my back.

But amidst all your posts, you've yet to explain why you think that this statement is incorrect, besides the established difference in the JavaScript engines:

TI-994A wrote:The JavaScript code runs atop an embedded [JavaScript] Engine which acts as an interpreter to the Java environment. It is not compiled to Dalvik bytecode.

Please, enlighten us with your thesis.

TI-994A wrote:But amidst all your posts, you've yet to explain why you think that this statement is incorrect, besides the established difference in the JavaScript engines:

TI-994A wrote:The JavaScript code runs atop an embedded [JavaScript] Engine which acts as an interpreter to the Java environment. It is not compiled to Dalvik bytecode.

Tenaja already explained it to you, V8 is not an interpreter.

Google Developers:
"V8 compiles JavaScript source code directly into machine code when it is first executed. There are no intermediate byte codes, no interpreter."

You thought your second sentence was the sucker punch I was going to walk into, didn't you? Wrong again.

the.weavster wrote:...V8 is not an interpreter.

Couldn't agree with you more.

But before you would be able to fully understand my earlier statement, you'd have to first apply this citation to the Android environment:

Google Developers wrote:V8 compiles JavaScript source code directly into machine code when it is first executed.

How does this machine code run on Android?

TI-994A wrote:But before you would be able to fully understand my earlier statement, you'd have to first apply this citation to the Android environment:

Google Developers wrote:V8 compiles JavaScript source code directly into machine code when it is first executed.

How does this machine code run on Android?

I did fully understand your earlier statement - it was wrong. Feel free to carry on bullshitting though if it makes you feel better.

the.weavster wrote:

TI-994A wrote:But before you would be able to fully understand my earlier statement, you'd have to first apply this citation to the Android environment:

Google Developers wrote:V8 compiles JavaScript source code directly into machine code when it is first executed.

How does this machine code run on Android?

I did fully understand your earlier statement - it was wrong. Feel free to carry on bullshitting though if it makes you feel better.

The plain and simple fact is, you don't know jack.

With your pedestrian knowledge of the topic, all you could muster is a bunch of menial posts.

In future, don't point fingers if you can't back it up.

Native code doesn't mean anything with Android or development pipelines. How much less resources do you think your native code is going to use where you match features? Unless I have a building full of seasoned developers I want less type handling and allocation code and more high level modules. It's all about economics and stability as a individual with no team, or capital for out-sourcing..

If you're worried about under-utilized clock cycles and wasted bytes you're probably not going to finish anything, or at least not within a beneficial time-frame..

tj1010 wrote:Native code doesn't mean anything with Android...

Not true. A native process (meaning code compiled AOT with the Android NDK and executed through JNI), runs exponentially faster than its pure Java counterpart.

TI-994A wrote:The plain and simple fact is, you don't know jack.

No, I don't know Jack, is he your boyfriend? He has my sympathy, I'm sure he could do better.

TI-994A wrote:With your pedestrian knowledge of the topic, all you could muster is a bunch of menial posts.

Hey, but at least my 'pedestrian knowledge' was correct, that's a big step up from your worthless contribution which descended into absurdity because you're too vain and spineless to hold your hands up and admit you're wrong.

the.weavster wrote:Hey, but at least my 'pedestrian knowledge' was correct...

Yes, you clearly possess nothing more than pedestrian knowledge; but no, it's still not correct. Just a self-admission of stupidity.

You cited a statement from the Google Developer website, while having absolutely no idea how it applies to Android. Clearly a cut-and-paste troll job.

Enough said.

TI-994A wrote:You cited a statement from the Google Developer website, while having absolutely no idea how it applies to Android.

"how it applies to Android"
That was your pathetic, feeble-minded attempt to save face after it finally sunk into your thick head that V8 does not "act as an interpreter".

TI-994A wrote:

tj1010 wrote:Native code doesn't mean anything with Android...

Not true. A native process (meaning code compiled AOT with the Android NDK and executed through JNI), runs exponentially faster than its pure Java counterpart.

Does it have access to the same functionality the SDK provides? Last I looked at NDK it was mostly rendering API.

It's crazy people don't get why as a single developer tackling big projects on reasonable time-frames you should go for official managed code.

tj1010 wrote:Does it have access to the same functionality the SDK provides?

Of course it does, but being compiled AOT into shared objects, it executes much faster.

tj1010 wrote:It's crazy people don't get why as a single developer tackling big projects on reasonable time-frames you should go for official managed code.

Not for speed-critical tasks, when a faster option is available.