So I somehow managed to lead myself into learning Java. I have to ride it out for the moment becuase I have a major Comp Sci project to do, and I don't know any other languages (well, apart from the usual VB, Delphi, Turbo Pascal - not very useful for a final year project).
Question is, should I stick with Java after I finish university and try and get a job with that? Or should I abandon it and move on to a different language?
So far, I like Java, it is stupidly verbouse, but that kind of reminds me of Turbo Pascal, so it's no biggy. Java seems really strict when it comes to OO, which is giving me a real headache seeing as this is the first OO language I've used.
I think the main reason I like it is that it's cross platform. But I'm willing to learn something else if it's going to be better for me in the long-run (job wise). Any suggestions?
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-18 2:44
>>39
Google is using Java for WHAT exactly? You can't know unless you work for them, so STFU.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-18 3:54
>>31
.NET replacing C?
Try writing an OS in .NET.
C will be around for a long time.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-18 6:07
Any big company ends up using anything. Sure, Google uses Java somewhere (some idiot manager got in and wanted to reduce TCO and optimize the flow of business, they should fire him), but Google also uses LISP, Python, PHP...
If you need a low level language (for system and performance-critical programming), you need C. C++ is complicated and sucky; Java and .NET will never be lower-level languages.
If you need a high level language (for applications, web and rapid prototype programming), you need Python or Ruby. Can do with PHP and Perl in some cases. Java and .NET are too cumbersome in Java's case retarded to do the job.
Java and .NET just don't have a place; if they exist is because Sun and Microsoft shove them up managers asses, and the idiot clueless ones (i.e. the majority of them) do whatever acronyms they read in a stupid magazine.
But open source rarely has retarded managers leeching off the money and dealing with their low TCO, enterprise-grade stupidity. Open source is directed by the people who knows. Hence, there are more C/Python/Ruby open source projects (also C++, because some people like it) than Java and .NET.
>>46 But open source rarely has retarded managers leeching off the money and dealing with their low TCO
ahahahaha.....you'd be surprised. Retarded managers will latch onto anything. ATM in my organization open source happens to be one of them, resulting in massive quantities of failure.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-19 5:19
>>46
HAHAHA. Obviously you never programmed for large organization. Java and .NET are the prefered language over phyton or ruby. Those two (p&r) works well for small application where security and application's performance is not of the main concern.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-19 5:35
>>48
moron, python or ruby are not less secure than the others
>>48
Ok, I like .net and all, but I have no idea what you're smoking. Knowing python or ruby is an advantage when you know when, where and how to use it in combination with other stuff.
>>48
First: Python and Ruby are as secure or insecure as Java. Second: Speed requirement has nothing to do with application size. Third: Hardware costs are much lower than development costs, which makes Python and Ruby more suitable for most things enterprises need.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-21 4:07
java is probably the least suitable language for most things enterprises need. just look at how long it takes to write a simple hello world program. i could write a simple cgi message board in x86 assembly in less time.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-21 4:45
class hello { public static void main(String[] penis) { System.out.println("hello world!"); } }
That didn't take me long. I even got to make my hello world objectoriented, awesome!
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-21 11:03
>>54
print 'hello world!'
takes less time to learn, think of, remember, and write. And zOMG it's not OO because OO is not universal goodness.
>>55
Oh, please. I can make a language where an empty program print a 'hello world' message. That wouldn't make that language better than C, Java, etc.
>>56
Why do static functions fail? The entire class that contains my main is made up of static functions, anything that doesn't need to be OO is in my Main. Is this a bad design decision?
If you only ever need one instance of your class, keep it static. Singleton classes are (with few exceptions) just for OO-obsessed horsefuckers who would rather spend all day masturbating over squeezing everything into their 'perfect' design model than getting any real work done.
Name:
Anonymous2006-11-23 9:05
Java is just for OO-obsessed horsefuckers who would rather spend all day masturbating over squeezing everything into their 'perfect' design model than getting any real work done.
fixed.