There are similar issues if you want to actually use many of the features higher level languages come with. You can't declare an array of objects for example, only an array of references to objects, which isn't cache friendly. It's not just value types, it's reference indirection everywhere. > Yes, there are some performance issues regarding lack of value types, but not every single game is going to be the next Crysis.

So do good c/c++ programmers, especially now that it's increasingly rarely taught in university and there is less fresh meat coming into the industry, yet games still get made. > Good Java programmers are better payed to write High Performance Trading systems, than working on games with their low salaries and crazy schedules. I can see LWJGL being useful, most particularly to help keep the infrastructure under the same language so that development and long-term maintenance are not a nightmare. This does require an experienced developer which understands how his code is impacting performance.įor example, avoiding ArrayLists or String objects and learning to use direct arrays or char objects. In one side this is due to the JVM optimizations done automatically, the other side is having developers that understand how to write efficient code. Our internal performance testing is ranking Java on par with the C++ implementations of the same algorithm (performance typically flattens until a bottleneck is reached such as disk read speed) or completing the same tasks faster. I've been writing high-performance Java code since years (chewing a few trillion computer files as fast as possible) and we certainly would have switched to anything else such as C++ if it was faster. I've noted this to be true in regards to salary.

Lwjgl 2 vs 3