GCJ isn't very good yet, and it won't even be as good as it should be in 4.1.
Name:
Anonymous2005-11-15 17:57
Java sucks, not because it's "slow" (every language that isn't C has to suffer being called slow) but because it's an B&D language.
Name:
Anonymous2005-11-15 18:27
what a wonderful term for a bad thing...
Name:
Anonymous2005-11-17 6:02
>>4
is it a BnD lang because it is Sun's little brat or is there some other reason? The base of each class in Object seems to make it far from a Pascal or COBOL.
Name:
Anonymous2005-11-17 7:27
>>6
It's a B&D language because it ties you up, whips you until you cry, makes you jump through hoops and expects you to enjoy it.
Name:
Anonymous2005-11-18 4:16
So, summarizing, I think most of us will agree on the following statement:
The main problem with javur is not that it has the B&D nature. Far from it. Ada has the B&D nature and it's actually not all that bad in certain applications.
No, the most evil hideous piece of shit aspect of Java is how it de facto _forces_ programmers to do cut-and-paste in order to get anywhere. I'm just hoping that it ends up being one of those things that the future generations look back upon as a warning for their children and their grandchildren: "do not take a half-assed OO paradigm and shoehorn every godawful abortion of an interface to comply with its entirely nebulous principles!"
The sad part here is that the oldest versions of Java used to be kind of nice, if you could stomach having your graphical helloworld run as slow as microsoft word on that shit-hot 166mhz pentium. Urgh.
I am so proud of not knowing Java, because so many people hate it, it must be really bad!!
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-01 15:13
most people who hate Java started on c or c++.
Java's simple, easy to use, makes sense and doesn't force you to spend hours debugging fucking null pointer exceptions. It's easy to learn with, makes sense and 99% of the time the speed doesn't even matter (how many people who aren't games programmers write code that'll tax a 3ghz system (provided you have some knowledge of optimisation) ?!?! Most of the complaints are due to poor implementations of the Virtual machines by users who haven't a clue about the point of Java.
Don't get me started on the fact that C doesn't have one of the most absolute basic data types included by default...
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-01 15:33
most people who hate Java started on c or c++
I started on C++ and failed. Then I was taught Java and initially liked it for exactly the reasons you stated. Then later I started to hate it because it's really really boring and makes you work hard to do things that should be easy.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-01 16:55
Don't get me started on the fact that C doesn't have one of the most absolute basic data types included by default...
One of the main points of C is to be a portable assembly language. Adding string operations would mean that a statement wouldn't have an obvious assembly equivalent.
>>15
I agree completely agree that Java is easier to program in than c++ and obviously c. Abstracting away any requirement to deal with pointers/addressing is one reason. Another is that Java is just generally one level of abstraction above c++ with one line/operation/whatever in Java requiring multiple in c++. In general tho good experienced c++ developers will be able to develop like for like just as easily.
This does not stop java from sucking ass. While it has great design in principle in practice it tends to fail. The majority of peoples customers use windows computers, yet from what I have seen Java applications
- do not completely match the look and feel of windows correctly
- do not operate components as a windows user would expects forcing developers to spend a lot of extra time and money programming it to.
- as everyone normally says about Java it runs like a dog compared to c/c++/.net applications.
I am not one of the people who accepts that, due to java’s cross-platform compatible design, it must operate greatly slower/inferior to native applications. .net has an almost equivalent top level design and it looks just like a windows application and runs with a far lower overhead java. I blame Java's sucking on crap VM implementation, stupid library design decisions, total failure to aim to cater for mass market first.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-01 22:32
You won't use Java to do C's (and sometimes C++'s) job. Yessir, I can see you writing an OS or a driver in Java. Righto!
Likewise, you won't use C to do something Java is good at. There's just one problem: Java isn't the only language that is good at those sets of problems, and the alternatives are a shitload better.
Would I write a website in C or C++? No, I'd rather use Java. But if I'm given a free choice I wouldn't use Java either, because it's is fucking ugly in every possible way. If I want to save my time and sanity, I'll use a different language.
You haven't programmed in Java then. When designing Java programs you're given a choice of API's to use for the look and feel of the windows, you can either use one that's cross platform and will look the same on any system or you can use one that is designed for a single OS and looks like normal programs running on it but you lose the cross platform capability.
The choice you get is AWT, which uses native toolkits and will "fit in" with whatever system the program is run on, or Swing which looks the same wherever it goes and was essentially part of Sun's attempt to convince everyone they should all use a Java OS.
Nowhere do you use the cross platform capability; Sun would never let that happen since in the beginning it was one of their main marketing points.
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-02 11:47 (sage)
You could do it using JNI...
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-02 15:27
Nowhere do you lose the cross platform capability
fixed
Name:
Anonymous2005-12-02 17:36
Java is highly productive
Java is write once, run everywhere
Java is virtually as fast as C++
Java is what you need
Java is good for everything
Java is the future
...or so Sun says :P
There's a Spanish proverb that says: "Tell me what you brag about and I'll tell you what you lack."
Until you're forced to redesign a UI for a particular OS because it looks like shit or is hard to use using their APIs. To be truely cross platform a program operate in the same manner and not be dependant on the OS to how the user's able to use it.