I used VB 6 a while ago before I started learning some real languages. However, I still can't get over how much easier it was to make GUI applications in VB, despite how much the language itself sucked. Window toolkits for other languages are horrible to use and rarely come with a real visual editor - Tk sucks ass, Swing sucks ass, win32 API in C is either a pain in the ass or I can't figure out a good way to do it...
I haven't tried MFC or any .NET shit yet. How the hell do people write real Windows apps? Should I try something else?
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-01 12:30
>>75
| "JBoss isn't an appserver, just EJB, you still need <our service here>"
I'm going to add something else here: while JBoss did start out as just an EJB container, it grew into a complete appserver. This highlights yet another problem with most Java fanatics- their knowledge is stuck in the past. They just plain never fucking learn anything anymore, the world just passes them by. I constantly meet people who have absolute NFI that there are other collection classes besides Vector.
Sun likes to tout how their certifications never expire as an advantage over the MS ones. I think it's a fucking good idea that MS forcibly expires your certs after a few years; forces the bozos who rely on pieces of paper, to stay reasonably up to date. Maybe if you beat it into their heads enough times they'll learn.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-01 13:37
>>80
Which definition of strongly-typed are we talking about here?
We're also talking about a supposedly OO language here...whose base type is not object
In computer science and computer programming, the term strong typing is used to describe how programming languages handle datatypes. The antonym is weak typing. However, these terms have been given such a wide variety of meanings over the short history of computing that it is often difficult to know what an individual writer means by using them.
Programming language expert Benjamin C. Pierce has said:
"I spent a few weeks... trying to sort out the terminology of "strongly typed," "statically typed," "safe," etc., and found it amazingly difficult.... The usage of these terms is so various as to render them almost useless."
Most generally, "strong typing" implies that the programming language or implementation enforces some kind of constraints upon programs, preventing them from running code which uses data in an invalid way. For instance, an integer addition operation may not be used upon strings; a procedure which operates upon linked lists may not be used upon numbers. However, the nature and strength of these constraints is highly variable.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-02 10:30
Constraints aren't always useful, and unavoidable constarints are often a pain in the ass. You don't want to shoot your foot when programming. I find particularly disturbing how Java bitches when you assign 0 to a short. Holy fuck.
I think flexibility and expressivity are more important than being full of constraints if you're a good coder. And if one must cope with constraints, at least I want a "SHUT THE FUCK UP I KNOW LOL" per call switch to silent all exceptions and system warnings, like PHP's @ .
Why does it complain when you assign 0 to a short? Surely that is within range?
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-03 12:42
do you guys even know what constraints are lol because this doesn't appear to be the case
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-04 13:57
>>85
Because it's a fag, of course it's within range, but OMG integer literals are int. Stupid compiler.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-04 15:15
Funny. My javac doesn't seem to have that problem.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-04 23:36
I haven't seen that in javac. It does complain when I implicitly downcast int or double, though, and it's an error, so it still makes them unusable. And it doesn't optimize 'a++; a++;'!
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-05 6:05
>>88 >>89
That happened three years ago when I was checking Java out and decided it's not cool, maybe it doesn't happen anymore.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-05 7:22
And it doesn't optimize 'a++; a++;'
Who cares? How can you even tell?
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-05 10:04
>>91 Who cares?
Everybody in his/her right mind. It's an optimization a compiler could do without hurting development time or any other side effect, so it's an optimization you want done.
How can you even tell?
Very simple profiling.
Name:
Malevolyn2006-02-05 11:51
Use wxWindows and Dev-C++ for Windowed apps. Really easy.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-05 12:51
Profiling? Let's talk about bytecode.public class Foo
{
int f(int x)
{
x++;
x++;
return x;
}
int g(int x)
{
x++;
int y = x;
y++;
int z = y;
return z++;
}
}
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-08 14:42
>>94
Of course it's lazy, Sun especially asked that all Java compilers should NOT optimize anything at all. Everything is optimized during the JIT compilation.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-08 17:32
Everything is optimized during the JIT compilation.
That's not exactly bright.
If you think about it, a compiler is also just an optimization. So why load everything on the JIT?
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-08 18:12
Sun especially asked that all Java compilers should NOT optimize anything at all.
Yet another retarded idea from Sun.
The JIT runs in the client every fucking time. Instead of spending 50 extra seconds in the development machine when compiling the release version, Sun makes users spend 1 extra second each, making the program look less responsive and lamer. If you have 1000 users that use your application 10000 times each, and that's not much really, this means Sun has wasted nearly four months of humanity's time.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-09 8:15
It's worth noting that I do vaguely recall something about some optimization switches in javac (back when I had to deal with the horror).
So some form of optimization can go on during compilation. Does >>95 know what they're talking about (aka, links proving this, please).
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-09 8:40 (sage)
99
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-09 8:40
100GET!
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-09 10:13
>>95 >>96 >>97 >>98
If you go by anything said by those who signed their rights away to look at Sun's JVM source code, it's an extraordinary pile of junk.
Although it could just be a ploy for Sun to go "looks like you need more memory, hur hur! We gots some right here!" Have you seen the fucking prices Sun sells memory at?
A pre-JIT compiler (e.g. javac, csc) is supposed to reduce the work the JIT has to do to make its final compilation decision, NOT MORE. Static compilers have infinitely more time to make a decision, while the JIT has more current data.
Name:
Anonymous2006-02-23 17:28 (sage)
If you know nothing, start with QB to get some basics down =P