I've noticed in the short time I've been reading this board that there's a lot of java bashing, so I was wondering why people actually think it is so bad. I'm no java fan, but I've used it for some stuff before and it didn't seem terrible to me. An argument used to be that it runs slow as a guro-fied loli, but they've improved a lot in that aspect.
Please give good reasons, rather than stuff like "it's for certified professional consultants" or whatever you guys say.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-07 7:30
Just read the board man. This thread is trollbait.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-07 7:33
>>1
Just to make it quick:
- Half assed OO approach (no multiple inheritance, no operator overloading, ...)
- No structured programming support
- Verbose syntax
- Shitty lists compared to other modern languages
- Anal typing
and most of all...
- An insane, overgeneralised, overengineered, blOOated, terrible API that manages to make the simplest things require the usage of a factory class to create an object which works with a new buffer object which requires a printer object which implements- shit sux fag. Argh, how I hate this bullshit. The Java API is shit. Try doing anything serious with it. You'll find you have to instantiate several classes of insanity and read the docs for 15 minutes while walking through a mile of hierarchical insanity just for the simplest of things. Sure, the API implements quite a bit of stuff. But it does so so BADLY, you'll want to do all that by hand if you can.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-07 7:35
>>2
Also, it's for certified Sun professional consultants who always produce the best quality enterprise business software based on industry standard best practices and XML.
Oh, and I almost forgot:
- PHP, Python, Perl, Ruby, and many other languages and APIs are about 5 to 10 times more productive. No exaggerating here, these are the lowest estimations of my company.
But it does so so BADLY, you'll want to do all that by hand if you can.
Hahaha, fucking signed.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-07 9:41
>>5
Functions. sin is a function. Factories are functions. Some stuff are naturally functions and thus better modelled with functions.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-08 9:19 (sage)
>>3
You forgot the current holy grail fad of Java, SPRING!!!
YES!!! Now, you, too can replace 10 lines of Java with 100 lines of unintelligeble and unmanageable XML goop!!!!!
hahah i use a full blown spring hibernate combo. it actually it's pretty good in terms of connection & db pooling. stateless beans and db data modeling. if you're just writing hello world -ish programs, of course php or pearl is better. but if you want to use appservers over 1000+ connections and wanna manage the sockets/threads and failure means costing your company money, yeah, use java. they've done it to bits. couple it try using php for db connection pooling assholes. you kids have no idea. i'm not even going to bother explaining why 100 lines of xml goop will save you at least twice that amount of self-written, unreliable code. try impl your business logic just using servlet whilst ensuring that the entire process is threadsafe mutually exclusive.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-08 14:05
i'm >>9. just to reiterate. no single programming language sucks it all serve some purpose. those who dismisses java will never build anything awesome/fun/exciting. real c programmers know better. there is a time and place for everything.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-08 14:40
those who dismisses java will never build anything awesome/fun/exciting
I loled.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-08 15:21
>>9 >>10
I totally agree. You should also consider learning english. It's a language that has a time and a place.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-09 4:08
| try impl your business logic just using servlet whilst ensuring that the entire process is threadsafe mutually exclusive.
We're not stupid, that's why we don't like Java. We don't fall for stupid artifically created problems that Java makes. This is Java:
A poor man comes to the rabbi complaining that his family has only one small room, many kids, and almost no money.
The rabbi says, "Take all your money, buy a goat, and keep the goat in your room. Come back in a month."
"But, rabbi, we don't have enough space even for us," the man said
"Just do what I say," the rabbi replied.
A month later the man comes back complaining that the goat smells and breaks everything.
"Sell the goat and come back in a month," the rabbi tells him.
A month later the man comes back to the rabbi with flowers. "Thank you, rabbi! We're so happy the goat is out, now we have more room and some money!"
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-09 4:40
fair enough, >>13, but there are a couple instances where java can be handy. Nothing serious, but things like ourtunes where it doesn't need amazing performance to download some music. Things you don't leave open for significant amounts of time. A torrent client is taking it too far. Business-class software is a horrible idea. But small things? Sure. Saves people the trouble of porting it to *nix, a common concern for software built on a Windows platform (See: dbPowerAMP, dvdshrink, Musicbrainz Tagger (Though you'd never want to write these in java, to be sure))
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-09 15:19
>>8
If we count I already replaced 1 line of Python with 10 lines of Java... we get my 80 line program ends up being 8000 lines. Javurrrrrrrrr
>>9 failure means costing your company money, yeah, use java.
If costing your company money matters, don't use Java, unless you want to sabotage it.
>>10 those who dismisses java will never build anything awesome/fun/exciting
If you need Java to build something awesome/fun/exciting, then you have a different concept of what's awesome, fun and exciting.
real c programmers know better
Real C programmers are just as pissed at Java as we are.
>>14 Nothing serious, but things like ourtunes where it doesn't need amazing performance to download some music. Things you don't leave open for significant amounts of time.
The fact Java sucks less at these doesn't mean it's better than everything else. In these cases, you would have done much better with other languages.
But small things? Sure. Saves people the trouble of porting it to *nix
Hi2u, ever heard of Python, Ruby, PHP, or Perl?
P.S.: They are usually more portable than Java.
Name:
PPie2006-04-10 13:18
First of all the big beef programmers have with Java is that it runs on a VM. Yes, the thought of cross platform language is nice, however it doesn't have too much use when it comes to commerical applications or games seeing as everything is emulated. (Even today some 64 games can't be emulated quickly, and those emus were probably written in C\C++)
Second IMO is the lack of pointers, java internally uses pointers however unless the programmer can use them they can't access the power they give. If you're used to programming in C you would know how powerful pointers can be, not just for passing parameters but many other things as well.
Third that relates to #2, the File IO is a piece of shit. They should scrap it and start over. Because Java is a massive blob of inheritance doing a low level copy of data is impossible. So your objects have to be serialized before they can be written to any file. Depending on how this is done I can or can't be a chore. But take it to concideration that C has 5 functions that can do anything you need fopen, fclose, fseek, fread, fwrite.
The fourth is a personal vandetta, I dislike the GUI design the most. It's not difficult setup, sometimes it can be, but it's more long and boring.
Really the only plus to Java besides being cross platform is that it teaches basic concepts of programming quickly. Other then that it's a C++ rip off with no pointers and garbage collection.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 13:37
>>16 has chosen all the wrong reasons to hate Java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 14:02
>>16
If you hate java because it runs on a VM, you're probably as big a bigot as those that populate java.net
I almost forgot there were right reasons to hate Java. To be fair, Java is easy to program in. It does take up less time then usual, however it's a complete trade off. If you give up time, you give up flexability and preformance. Java VM is written in C, so I think C\C++ is a good reference point for bias. Seeing as that Java's purpose was to be a crossplatform language designed to fix the problems both C\C++ had. (Essentially reducing flexability)
I remember when the internet was first starting to become more graphic and applets started popping up, now those things are normally done in flash. It's been a while since I've seen a website use a java applet.
Application design, yes. It is easy to make a small application, and there are a few that use Java. Azerus is a good one. It's nice that it's cross platform, but it under preforms when compared to others written in Python or C\C++. (I switched from Azerus to BitCommet, now I can handle 20 torrents with 100 connections each, as opposed to 3 torrents with 100 connections.) Is there many commerical applications written in Java? Most users I would say run a windows system, and with the .NET interface it makes it as easy to program in it as Java (maybe more).
Game design. Java does make it easier to devolope 3D applications then if you were to write them in another language. However making something like that easier (In Java3Ds case) restricts the devoloper from accessing low level functions. Not that this matters a whole lot, it's just a bit restrictive if you like flexability with a graphics API.
The only reason I see Java being taught is to quickly boost someone who doesn't understand programming well to a state where they understand basic concepts. It's easy to setup, it's easy to compile and run. You don't have to deal with nasty memory leaks or crashes (well, you do if you don't check your exceptions). It takes less time because it's a high level language and you don't have to deal with pointers, which is a godsend for some first year students at University.
java.net? I don't visit java.net, or any other Java site. I just use it for classes, the only other place I get resources for java is the API docs. I'm not a bigot, I could tell you the same for VB since it runs bytecode as well.
The guy wanted reasons why people don't like, or could not like Java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 14:45
>>19
| Java is easy to program in. It does take up less time then usual
| Java does make it easier
You see, there's the problem. It's all theory that doesn't stand up in the real world, the very fundamental reason for Java sucking. Java makes everything convoluted and should be banned from education for giving students misleading impressions. If they don't understand the basic concepts, they should start with C so they learn not to go around shooting and blowing off their foot and everyone else's on every line. If you're only after teaching concepts, there are far better languages than Java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 14:58
To be fair, Java is easy to program in. It does take up less time then usual,
No. No no no no. No.
Name:
PPie2006-04-10 15:00
>>21
If I were starting again the last thing I would like to start with is objects. I remember my first Java class, the professor in order to teach the students bent the truth about how to programming, only to fix himself later when the students understood enough to grasp the concepts. I remember shaking my head during that class a lot.
I'm going to have to at the same time agree and disagree. Yes, it is all theory but you shouldn't mix up theory and syntax. Polymorphism is theory, and it doesn't change from language to language. What does change is the syntax. The graphics setup is hidden, which makes it easier for the user to interface with it. This is a shady spot of Java, you can't really gain any understanding of how graphics works with high level access.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 15:59
>>19
Java sucks if you do any serious game programming. Or serious programming on a whole for that matter. It's shitty memory management makes it a horrible choice for everything but web programming.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 19:29
However making something like that easier (In Java3Ds case)
I just want the world to know that I think Java3D sucks. It really, really stinks. If you're looking for a scene graph, look elsewhere.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 19:52
>>24
It's really a bad choice for web programming too
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 20:10
>>16 it doesn't have too much use when it comes to commerical applications or games seeing as everything is emulated. (Even today some 64 games can't be emulated quickly, and those emus were probably written in C\C++)
Uh, no, there's a bit difference between console emulators and the Java VM. Java doesn't suck beacause of the VM. There are slower, interpreted languages that don't suck, while Java sucks even if it outperforms them sometimes.
lack of pointers
You only deal with them in low-level programming languages, not high level ones.
File IO is a piece of shit
Agree. Just all IO and string manipulation is a piece of shit in the Java API.
I dislike the GUI design the most
You mean Swing?
it teaches basic concepts of programming quickly
I would never teach Java to my kids. I'd start with a simple language like Pascal, then move to C ASAP, and once they understand how things work in low level, I'd build higher level, high productivity languages on top: modern scripting languages and functional languages. I would never teach Java to a student, unless I hated him/her.
>>19 To be fair, Java is easy to program in.
No. It's a pain in the arse.
It does take up less time then usual
You sure about that?
Is there many commerical applications written in Java?
Unfortunately, a good part of paid software today is written in Java because the assholes who decide what technologies to use have no fucking idea and read Java's the best practice industry standard in some magazine.
Most users I would say run a windows system
They do, but in some companies they don't. And don't forget server software.
the .NET interface it makes it as easy to program in it as Java (maybe more).
Well, that's not saying much of .NET.
Game design. Java does make it easier to devolope 3D applications then if you were to write them in another language.
Out of all the things you can make in Java, 3D games will suck the most.
The only reason I see Java being taught is to quickly boost someone who doesn't understand programming well to a state where they understand basic concepts.
They teach Java to people who don't have a fucking idea about programming, then have them write serious software, and that adds to the lameness of the results. The code, if it ever works, is made of failed coder and shitty API. And most of the times these "Java coders" are involved, the project is eventually cancelled for one reason or another, or reassigned to programmers before it's to late.
It's easy to setup, it's easy to compile and run.
Most moden scripting languages are even easier: they don't need to be compiled.
You don't have to deal with nasty memory leaks or crashes
Crashes will always happen, one way or another. Trapping all exceptions and popping up a message box in the end that reads "Error: fail" is just as bad as a crash. Exceptions aren't an automagical way to get rid of programming errors. In fact, they require a more experienced coder to be used properly.
It takes less time because it's a high level language
It takes more time than anything else because it blows. It's a mid level language at best, with a pathetic API that offers high level functionality in theory, but often makes you work for it worse than if you coded what you wanted from scratch.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-10 21:14
There's a java programmer, and then there's a programmer,
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-11 4:03
The reason Java sucks is because it supports pointers... NULL pointers.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-11 7:24 (sage)
Hear ye hear ye, null pointer exceptions should be banned from the world
That means you're fucking OUT jaba, you hear me you fucker?!
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-11 7:26
So what should happen if you try to call a method from a null variable, smartasses?
Foo bar = null;
bar.baz(); //oh shi-
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-11 7:42
The same thing that happens in Objective-C. Nothing at all.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-11 8:22
>>> i=None
>>> i.lol()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'lol'
It's understandable. The weird thing would be that it worked.
as i've so many times posted in /programming/, there is a place and time for all GP languages. real-time app domain may not use the standard java vm cos of the undeterministic behaviour of garbabe collection and mem management. however, this requirement is not applicable for webapps. for example, would you build a missile control sofware using java? probably not. after spending hours/months on designs and temporal constraints, you dont want to risk running that shit using j2me on an embedded device and find out, "oooh, its not scheduling properly and takes too long for the processor to do anything with the java bytecode". but, you'd probably want to utilise the componentised approach that java offers in a banking application for example. automated report and charts depicting the latests stock trend through the use of XML-RPC/crytal report etc etc. these things are awesome with java. easy, quick and simple.
all depends mate, there's no good and bad. just pros and cons FOR an application domain of interests. something that all engineers must consider.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-15 7:53 (sage)
| you dont want to risk running that shit using j2me on an embedded device
Priority inversion ftw!
| but, you'd probably want to utilise the componentised approach that java offers in a banking application for example. automated report and charts depicting the latests stock trend through the use of XML-RPC/crytal report etc etc. these things are awesome with java.
rofl. Far better ways than java to do this. Especially if you want to use XML-RPC.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-15 10:33
Lack of generic programming in Java, at the method level, means that if you want to implement your own heapsort algorithm you either need to copy-paste it for all the key types (i.e. sorting by int, by float etc) or wrap them in the idiotic Numeric implementations (Integer, Float etc) and suffer the indirect function call overhead.
Most of the time the performance freaks go with the copy-pasting. And we should all know what copy-pasting does to maintainability.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-16 6:02 (sage)
>>51
Java 1.5 has generics.........by erasure, which means everything is still Object, and performance freaks will still go copypasta.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-20 18:20
I would like to inquire what languages you Java bashers /do/ like to code in then if we can all just stop griping for a second. Specify recommendations for web, app development, and cross-platform compatibility, what makes it /not/ suck, and then your /least/ favorite thing about using it. Level the playing field a bit?
if (language == "Java") {
please_kill_me();
} else {
i_can_take_it();
}
I don't care what that other languages is, and I don't really have any favorites. They all have the good, bad, and ugly. But Java... just no.
I'm probably not the only one who thinks like this.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 5:11
>>54
Java has good, bad and ugly too:
The good: You sound like a professional solutions certified engineer when you say you're writing Java, regardless of if you're writing a piece of crap, and you get paid well.
The bad: The language
The ugly: Having to work with it
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 6:52
>>54 >>55
You don't even know why you hate Java, you're teh funny! Java is a good language, and it has NO equivalent for big projects (and no, Python is not an equivalent, it's slow and not scalable).
Java is a solution in search of a problem. Well, other than some poor masochistic sods who ignorantly believe it's actually good for something. Give it to me! *smack* OOoooh, harder! *swish*
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 8:12
>>56
Ah, the mating call of the Certified Java Professional: "That won't scale. Needs more Enterprise."
Funny thing was that Java was originally intended to be an embedded language for set top boxes. That didn't work out, so some moron invented applets. Finally it ended up on servers, hidden behind mountains of frameworks and XML. Now people are abandoning it for languages that don't punish you for believing in the KISS principle; Ruby on Rails seems to be the future unless something better comes along. A simple, powerful language with a simple, powerful framework.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 8:32
No, >>56 is right! There is no equivalent for Java in big projects. Nothing else but Java could possibly SUCK as much for big projects.
Also, what languages besides C++ (and now Java) has support for generic programming?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 10:38
>>61
I apologise for offending your delicate sensibilites. Simplicity is the enemy of Enterprise after all. Why use 100 lines of code when a framework will do?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 11:39
Also, what languages besides C++ (and now Java) has support for generic programming?
>Among object-based and object-oriented languages, Ada, BETA, C++, D, Eiffel, and more recent versions of Java (J2SE 5.0 and higher) provide generic facilities. Some languages on the .NET Framework 2.0 platform, like VB.NET 2005 and C# 2.0, also utilize generics. Much earlier than in all mentioned languages, generic programming was implemented in CLU.
Dynamic typing, such as is featured in Objective-C, and, if necessary, judicious use of protocols circumvent the need for use of generic programming techniques, since there exists a general type to contain any object. Whilst Java does so also, the casting that needs to be done breaks the discipline of static typing, and generics are one way of achieving some of the benefits of dynamic typing with the advantages of having static typing.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 12:32
>>59
I'm not certified of anything at all, but Java is still used as an embedded language in hardware stuff like satellites. As for Ruby on Rails, it will never used seriously without some good doc. Ruby is an awesome language, Rails just sucks.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 13:56 (sage)
>>60 >>62
I guess you're 15 years old and write shitty games on SourceForge with the SDL?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 20:39
>>61 The KISS principle? GTFO you faggot.
No, you're the faggot! [Insert Antonio Banderas pic]
Also, what languages besides C++ (and now Java) has support for generic programming?
Are you stupid? Or haven't you got your head out of your ass long enough to notice all the good languages far more advanced than those two out there? You must think Java is so great because it now has Generic Programming™, OMG, so advanced! Sorry, but duck-typing languages don't even need that kind of thing, and no, Java invented nothing.
>>64
Java? Used in satellites? Everyone, take cover! They may fall anytime as the garbage collector operates, and to think what kind of certified asshats wrote their code makes me shudder.
>>65
Yes, because Java is used for enterprise commercial games, and enterprise software is too hardcore to care for productivity, right?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 21:47 (sage)
Satellites often use Forth you fucking idiot. Java? Jesus.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 22:03
Newsflash: contrary to popular opinion, Java doesn't scale well at all. This opinion is shared by the clueless, such as management, or ignorant fanboys who have little experience outside of the java their shit college taught them.
Anyone who has ever been involved, personally or on the periphery, with huge systems knows just how "scalable" Java is. There are several alternatives that put the scale in scalable, but they're not as mainstream as Java, ergo the clueless worshiping of what amounts to garbage.
It's amazing what a marketing machine can do.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-21 23:30
you know a language is full of garbage when your program freezes for an hour to run the "garbage collector"
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-22 7:45
>>66
Yes, java is used embedded in a lot of harware (which include satellites). But there is usually no GC (or a very small version of it).
>>68
Yes it does, that's why companies use it, otherwise they would use another language.
>>69
Blame Sun for their shitty implementation, not the language.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-22 8:00
Yes it does, that's why companies use it, otherwise they would use another language.
This claim is based on the assumption that managers aren't stupid. Worst. Assumption. Ever.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-22 10:48 (sage)
>>70
newsflash: every embedded java device suffers from major reliability problems. Toy satellite simulators don't count.
| Yes it does, that's why companies use it, otherwise they would use another language.
gahahahaha. Do you understand the words "sucker", "stupid" and "conned"?
| Blame Sun for their shitty implementation, not the language.
Sun is responsible for the shitty language, their shitty implementation, the shitty spec and the shitty RI which makes other implementations shitty.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-22 11:53
(which include satellites)
This is the funniest shit I've ever heard. I cannot imagine a satellite using Java. I simply cannot. It goes against everything I know about realtime embedded systems, particularly the hardened electronics they shoot up into space. It stinks like total bullshit from five miles away, the kind of bizarre tail only a completely fucking ignorant fool would believe.
So I went looking. Did a bunch of googling, trying to turn up a satellite, any satellite, that used Java anywhere in its onboard systems. Well, I turned up Java sometimes being used in tracking and other applications on the ground (oooooh, big deal there! total surprise!), but not one instance of Java on a satellite.
Which sounds totally right to me.
So, care to provide some proof of satellites actually using Java? I'm awfully curious.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-22 12:12
So, care to provide some proof of satellites actually using Java? I'm awfully curious.
How about that one that recently went crazy and left orbit, leaving New Zealand without Sky?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-23 14:59
>>73
you expect some company specialized in satellites, missiles and embedded software to tell you what they put in their products? looool
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-23 15:52
>>75
i would if i were considering buying their products...
>>76 >>77
You're posting on world4ch, you're poor, you're not a client, duh!
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-23 19:41
So why no hits on google? The only thing I've seen that comes close is Aicas' AERO-VM, which has never actually been used for its supposed purpose.
That's some real presence there!
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-24 9:20
>>79
Because
1) The ones that existed flopped so badly they removed all traces of it.
2) They no longer exist.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-24 21:09
>>62 >>66
Just to clarify, I'm >>61 and I'm not a java fanboy. But using acronyms like KISS is still fucking gay.
Also, my question about generics was not meant to imply that java is awesome because it has generics and no one else does. It was just a question. Because I actually didn't know.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-25 3:08
But using acronyms like KISS is still fucking gay.
It's a classic engineering principle.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-25 4:14
>>81
Oh, well then, other languages have generics but most modern (and some good old) languages don't even need them since they support duck-typing, polymorphism and overloaded operators. Take Python for example. When you define a function like f = lambda x, y: x < y (returns whether x is less than y), x and y can be any type when called, even different types, as long as they define the less-than operator. This works with builtin types like integers, floats or strings, as well as any custom class you create. There's no such thing as templates, although your code can dynamically create more code or modify existing classes, objects, hierarchies, etc. if you need.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-25 15:35
OCaml beats the shit out of Java any day.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-25 19:14
>>84
Well my good sir, that's not saying much of OCaml. I'm sure it has better things to shine for.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 9:24
OCaml beats the shit out of C++ any day too.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 9:34
>>86
Well my good sir, that's not saying much of OCaml. I'm sure it has better things to shine for.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 9:41
Gentlemen, I am certain that all members of our revered society here can solemnly agree that everything is indeed better than Java.
The intellectuals among us prefer the theoretical purity of languages like Lisp, Ocaml, Haskell, and the ilk, while those who are of a more pragmatic or playful nature tend towards Python, Ruby, C, and perhaps even Perl.
Well, except for sir de Sade over there, but we all know he has strange taste.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 21:13
>>82
It's not the concept that's gay, it's the acronym. What kind of people go around saying that anyway?
"Keep it thimple thilly!"
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 21:48
Haskell is not theoretically pure.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 21:55
Neither is Ocaml, but both are a major step up from The Rest(TM).
Languages that are truly theoretically pure are rather boring affairs. Languages that are actually used for something need to be a bit more pragmatic.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-26 23:47
ocaml Obj.magic lol
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 3:14
Java is bad because it's slow. How come it's slow? It uses byte code. Meaning, you have to basically "compile" the program every time you run the thing. Don't believe me? Go play Lineage II on L2J, and see how efficient it is. If Java was so great, databases and servers would be running off the thing. But of course, programmers are smart, so they use the stuff that is known to work. C++, C, Assembly, etc. AKA the real languages.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 3:19
>>93
no No NO. Java can be slow, sure, but the real reason it sucks is that it makes the programmer slow. The whole point of using a higher level language is to make it easier to write programs; Java makes it harder.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 3:32
Java is only hard because of 1 thing) OOP. The very fact you made that point means you don't know programming. OOP is made so that things are object oriented. In design, when you use objects, it's easier to program things and reuse. The point of OOP is that the initial difficulty in programming pays off later. You want slow? make a C GUI program. That's right, no such thing as a GUI since you have to make one yourself. Java sucks because the way Java runs itself is slow. If you were to use port C to have what Java has, I would be using C right now.
OOP is powerfull for real world complex aplications, also the Java people is working for better integration in the windows desktop. Also don't be fooled by the VM stuff, Java has a very sophisticated VM with eficient memory management. Anyway I hate JAVA!
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 3:53
>>95
Don't equate Java with OOP. Java has a broken version of OOP which requires you to do extra work to do even the simplest thing; it then shoves this down your throat at the Right Way to do things.
OOP isn't for programmers as much as it is for the non-programmer idiots who programmers have to work with who always shove shit like UML down our throats.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 5:36
>>97
Integration in Java-speak involves shitting a dozen ill-conceived and badly thought out parts around and trying to keep them together with puke while having to operate them all seperately.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 6:38
>>101
First we have distinguish between programming lovers and programmers/software engineers. OOP is for programers/software engineers, yes, you should see a large scale project with a bunch of databases interrelated, in several diferent platforms (not an imageboard like this, something very big with diferent systems)... then UML and OOP comes to the game, obviously. But yes, that's not what I call programing, that's projecting and the programing below is done mechanicaly. So programing lovers or hackers, like more languages like Ruby, Python, Lisp, or C and ASM for a deeper operating system interaction.
>>102
Yes, and with that they will certainly add some more parts, that they have to glue with "puke", and so it continues... And that's preciselly why I don't like Java.
I live everyday with a Java fan and he is allways talking about the "glue", seriously. And now I just ignore that, because if I "touch" his "glue" then he will come with the parts and the parts are cool in a certain way, but need glue, and that's what make Java so repulsive.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 7:26
Hm... This needs a list of facts:
1. High level languages are always slower, but that's a very affordable price for software used by companies and system scripts (which make up for a good portion of all the software produced) because hardware costs are much lesser than development costs.
2. Unless you're a low-level freak, higher level languages are more fun to work with because you don't waste your time dealing with strict data structures, "glue", or crap you need to support what you really want to do. Most programmers will thus like modern scripting languages (Python, Ruby, or even Perl, PHP and Lua) and functional languages (Lisp, Ocaml, Haskell, etc.) better than more anal languages like Java or C++.
3. Java's OO and data typing totally sucks, and the API is powerful but it's so overgeneralized, overgeneralized and bloated it's unusable and ugly, and it's made of fail and lose.
4. Therefore, Java is one of these slower VM languages, yet it doesn't allow you to work neither nicely nor faster, therefore it's a waste and a piece of crap.
5. On top of that, Java's garbage collector is terrible. Because of it, some things written in even higher level, duck-typing languages like Python may rival the performance of those written in Java using 5 times more lines of code and being pretty unmaintainable.
6. You can create GUI applications in C, duh. What do you think GDI, GTK, and some others work with? However, you will be more productive using a higher level language. As long as controls aren't terribly slow or fugly, it's usually acceptable, as most GUI applications are almost always waiting for the user to do something, not really running.
7. Managers suck. We already knew this, just restating.
8. UML is mostly manager stuff, they probably saw "ML" and thought it has something to do with XML, or read an overhyped article in some stupid magazine. UML is just a set of tools to represent software concepts. Sometimes you might decide to use part of it, modified or not, to think or document something, but it's not a religion, a best practice, or something so great in an on itself like managers believe.
9. Oh, and finally, save for small or embedded, today's processors are so complex a good C compiler will do a better job than an assembly guru, so unless you need to do something very special like an OS kernel, assembly is probably better left alone.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 7:36
4. Therefore, Java is one of these slower VM languages, yet it doesn't allow you to work neither nicely nor faster, therefore it's a waste and a piece of crap.
QFT
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-28 8:35
>>104 Point 9 - asm is also used in video related aplications like vlc and in other aplications, but inlining with C, like it's done also in Linux kernel. Asm is also good for hacking http://www.ollydbg.de/ and in some (simple) cases asm can perform better excluding overhead.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-29 23:45
Java is f'ing awesome.
1. Java has all the uml tools that you could want.
2. Tons of libraries and functions are available.
3. Everything has a pretty much standard form.
4. Works everywhere.
5. Can be compiled into a. bytecode b. Just In Time c. native code.
6. Easy to learn (1 caveat, takes writing a whole bunch of stuff before you can get to hello world and that turns some people off.)
7. Becoming a frickin' standard in the workplace and everywhere else.
8. Looks like C or C++ so everybody who programs in those catches on pretty quickly.
Speed wise, java is getting better. Just in time compiler makes things a bit faster. Will Java VM ever be as fast as native compiled? No. But, you can native compile java with gcj, eventually that will compile as fast to 'native code' as almost anything else.
Java is a damn good language. Programming is assembly is fun, but you don't do large projects in it. Programming in C can get to be a pain with memory problems. References are easier to program.
If you are going for all out speed, use C. No C++, just C. If you have to have the absolute best epeed, use assembly.
Java fits tons of niches and does a great job in being cross platform compatible. They made a few mistakes, true (like for instance their case-sensitivity *shiver*.) But, java is definately one of the best languages out there; it just isn't '1334'. Java bashing is a popular sport, but its silly. I'm far more productive in java than I am in C, and I don't have to worry about cross-compiler cross-platform problems.
Java is not a perfect language. But, give it time, It might just become the very best imperative language out there.
Two real concerns with the language:
1. Garbage collector = slow
I have no doubt that Sun follows a very minimalist scheme of trying to grab all the memory it can, rather than optimizing for speed. We need more options, like different vms. There are some open-source VMs out there but I haven't tested them.
2. Let me do my own memory management!
Let us turn off the frickin garbage collector and let us do our own frees. Seriously.
3. Case sensitivity annoying!
Case sensitivity is something for hungarian notation or a pretty printer to handle. Not for a programmer that has to hold down the damn shift key. That's also why I don't like languages that requires lots of %^&'s, because it is frickin hard to hit those keys. Sometimes you miss or it just slows you down alot, or even worse you have to concentrate on typing rather than coding. It's the same with the shift key, although not as bad. You have to press shift to get upper case (or use caps but that is only good for capitals right after another which java really doesn't do much) and it slows you down.
4. Tired of super huge typing requirements!
Everybody remembers ada 83. Every programmer hated it. The amount of typing required was ludicrous. The scheme for visual redundancy was enourmous. Clear code isn't worth that. Java requires such huge typing as well that I have always wondered why nobody has compared the two? Ironically, ada 2005 version is shaping up to be quite awesome, and if it actually got popular I'd probably switch to it, but nevertheless java takes quite a bit of typing.
5. They should have made a native compiler first and they should make the JIT compiler perfect.
Java has a rep for being slow? Why? Because everybody thinks of java as in terms of being interpreted. Byte code is a little faster than pure interpreted. Big deal. It's still way slower than native code. The JIT compiler is a neat idea, although it takes longer load times, but they need to get both working perfectly. Basically, if I had a choice, I'd JIT everything rather than using the VM, unless the program was really small and didn't use any resources at all.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 0:29
>>107 "1. Java has all the uml tools that you could want."
huh? waht is a uml tool?
Oh, wow, I always wanted to use UML tools. All this time that is exactly what I was missing.
Also, I'd love to know how many languages >>107 has ever programmed something non-trivial in. That post is so fanboy is reeks.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 5:31
>>107 1. Java has all the uml tools that you could want.
There are hundreds of languages you can apply UML design to. Incidentally, UML is not that great if it becomes a religion. It's usually just a manager thing. You take parts of UML and use them if you think they fit the job, that's how to use it.
2. Tons of libraries and functions are available.
Which are so overgeneralized and poorly engineered you want to redo them by hand instead of using them because you spend the same time doing it by hand or reading the docs through six fucking levels of insane inheritance.
3. Everything has a pretty much standard form.
Yes, but what happens when you hate the standard form?
4. Works everywhere.
There are subtle differences to the JVM that fuck up things every now and then. Higher level scripted languages are usually more portable.
5. Can be compiled into a. bytecode b. Just In Time c. native code.
This is not a functional advantage. I don't care how it's compiled, I just care about its performance. And being compiled that way means you get no eval() function, sandboxing, and other neat stuff.
6. Easy to learn
You actually mean easy to become a "Java professional" that comes up with "enterprise solutions"; read "idiot" and "shitty software made of a surprising number of misconceptions and failures".
7. Becoming a frickin' standard in the workplace and everywhere else.
Yes, because it's ENTERPRISE.
8. Looks like C or C++ so everybody who programs in those catches on pretty quickly.
Yes, because if I know how to use for, if, while, and the operators I know Java.
Will Java VM ever be as fast as native compiled? No.
It's not the speed what I'm usually complaining about.
But, you can native compile java with gcj, eventually that will compile as fast to 'native code' as almost anything else.
GCJ is actually slower.
Java is a damn good language.
Ever learnt Python or Ruby?
Programming is assembly is fun, but you don't do large projects in it.
Operating systems are a large enough project for you? They have to use parts of assembly. Oh and nobody is sane enough to use it when it's not strictly necessary.
Programming in C can get to be a pain with memory problems.
Ever heard of Boehm?
If you are going for all out speed, use C. No C++, just C.
I agree with this.
Java fits tons of niches and does a great job in being cross platform compatible.
Like Java invented portability.
I'm far more productive in java than I am in C, and I don't have to worry about cross-compiler cross-platform problems.
And if you learnt a real high level language like Python, you'd be far more productive in it than you are in Java and discover so many new things you don't know.
It might just become the very best imperative language out there.
Ha ha, um... no, because there already are better options.
1. Garbage collector = slow
Actually, it's more like "Java's garbage collector = slow".
2. Let me do my own memory management!
Are you serious?
3. Case sensitivity annoying!
Well, I mostly agree with you here; I usually prefer case preserving, case insenstive stuff, especially for files and typing commands interactively. However, I don't actually make any use of it when programming because I stick to strict naming standards, that's why I don't care much about case sensitivity in programming langauges.
4. Tired of super huge typing requirements!
Java requires you to type much because its API is poorly designed. Consider the amount of shit you have to pull out of your ass to just OPEN A FUCKING FILE DAMMIT!
5. They should have made a native compiler first and they should make the JIT compiler perfect.
I agree, but this is not the biggest deal.
>>110 Oh, wow, I always wanted to use UML tools. All this time that is exactly what I was missing.
Lol
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 6:23
>>111
| Yes, but what happens when you hate the standard form?
Or even better, incompatible between implementations
| Yes, because it's ENTERPRISE.
ENTERPRISEY
>>certified fanboy
|Java has a rep for being slow? Why? Because everybody thinks of java as in terms of being interpreted.
No, because it IS fucking slow
It should be noted that every point >>107 made has already been flogged, diseccted and ground into dust as BS in the 106 posts preceding it.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 20:25
Here's fanboy. Jake is the quake 2 engine running in java, hell, with enough work you could probably get it into an applet. Runs pretty darn fast for me. Running on an 850 Mhz processor. Runs on linux just fine. I assume it can run on windows, and maybe even mac!
Uses the insane JNI stuff and all those crazy features that are supposed to slow down java runtime even more. Yet, somehow, I am able to run it fullscreen and get a good framerate.
Well, I don't know if I could get a 'quake 3' in java running on this computer, as the c++ version would just barely work at 20dfps, but jeez, that's pretty considering how 'slow' java is!
Although, I know that quake 2 written in python or perl or smalltalk would run so much faster and I would be able to use javaws and jnlp stuff with it.
Yes, jogl, even fastjogl is doomed to failure because java has no ability to run anything and is as slow as the jolly green giant. If you run something in java it is automatically slow and seeing it run 3D games is the work of the hypno-gnome-fox-beasts. Yes, Java is the suckiest language ever and really even though it 'seems' to be useful, that is just a massive illusion caused by Sun(Satan) Microsystems and its army of magical gnome-fox-beasts who use advanced hypnotic mind control to masterbate java advocates so that they support the Java(tm) empire. I know this because there are only illogical reasons for liking java whatsoever, and anyone who comes up with a logical reason for liking java uses the 'backroom' for anal sex with the hypno-gnome-fox-beasts.
What other reasons would anybody have for supporting an OOP language of portability and C-like structure?
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 20:29
Hypno-gnome-fox-beasts are deceptively attractive.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 21:02
>>115
Uh, we're all (or at least most of us are) aware that Java performs well at long-running, non-realtime tasks. That's not why we hate it.
Here's what it sucks at: short-running tasks, realtime tasks, memory-hungry tasks, class semantics, and the absolute shittiest library ever seen. The last two points are why nobody who has experience in a variety of languages wants to touch Java.
If I want performance, there are better choices than Java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 21:27
Absolutely true.
But, isn't a 3D engine a realtime task?
I program in python, perl (limited knowledge), C (linux kernel and wine), C++, ada(95 and 2005), and lisp(limited knowledge).
When I was teaching myself data structures, I did it in java. Why? Because there were lots of good java books for it, and it was much easier to learn with references rather than having to worry about memory management all over the place.
Oh and regarding that 'let me do my own memory management comment' I mentioned that because I'm of the opinion that garbage collectors will usually be slower than manual memory management done with loving care. Although, the more I think about it, that's probably too low level to allow for java to do, within its security boundaries.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 21:29
Oh, and I also did intel assembly, that silly gnu/AT&T variant and the err normal stuff.
And strangely enough, I always enjoyed debugging (and I like C far more than C++,) but for some reason I've always liked ada and java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 21:33
Which reminds me, why doesn't somebody do a compiler for all of these languages like python to compile to java bytecode. I won't have the faintest idea how to do it, but it would be totally awesome. I know that JGNAT does that for ada, but that's about the only thing I know that does.
Name:
Anonymous2006-04-30 22:52
But, isn't a 3D engine a realtime task?
Only loosely. I didn't mean real-time as in real-time rendering, I meant real-time as in soft and hard guarantees.
When I was teaching myself data structures, I did it in java. Why? Because there were lots of good java books for it
Let me rephrase: you have no idea what you're talking about. Lots of words, little understanding.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 0:49
Funny, apparently was level of understanding is good enough to get me through my job and through college.
Seriously, you guys spend way too much over this mental masterbation of 'java bad! java bad!'
Ok, java isn't perfect. I haven't come across a perfect language yet. Since you usually have to decide between two mutually exclusive options, I don't know if the 'perfect' language is possible.
And hey, come on! I liked the idea of byte code and JIT, and all that crazy anti-hacker restrictions on java.
Oh, and as for the GC? Strip it out and you've still got Java. References aren't pointers. Oh, and you still got some crazy lingo in there. Besides, Java isn't the only C-like language.
C++,Objective C, D,.... and soo on....
I'm not giving up on yacc or lex anytime soon because of java and I don't think that any open-source C projects are going to be porting themselves anytime soon.
This 'java sucks' fascination comes out of some decent language being hyped up, therefore causing an instinctual desire in some people to say, 'that's not so great!'
Java doesn't have to be the perfect language. It's not faster than assembly. Ok. It's slower than it should be, in everybody's opinion. Ok, let's fix it or wait for it to be fixed. JNI uses some new method that halved call time. All sorts of things get changed all the time to speed up the implementation. Swing used to be bitch ass slow. Now, it's mediocre. Why? Apparently they use more native calls instead of using all java. Now, they can even use some hardware acceleration. Hey, that's just what I read. Don't shoot the messenger. Maybe in the future, they'll get it all right.
Don't use java to write quake 5. Use java to write your p2p application interface into your p2p core. Use java to write your multiplayer 2D adventure RPG game that you want to be able to play with your friends that use Windows and Mac and Solaris and FreeBSD instead of 1334 linux. (Sorry, even compiling library specific code between unixes can be a complete bitch sometimes)
Look, sorry. I'm not going to villify something that's useful. Something like java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 1:00
That said, I'm also to mention that Java is not very innovative as a language itself, but it is innovative as a 'huge'mongeous class library, a security model, and a virtual machine.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 1:51
I hope for your sake you're just trolling.
If you're serious, you're hopelessly clueless. There's no way you've left high-school yet either.
| Hey, that's just what I read.
Yes, read a lot of Sun garbage.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 15:59 (sage)
>>124
You mean the "huge" class library that provides less functionality than other base class libraries?
The broken security model?
Virtual machines which are nothing new?
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 17:13
Java doesn't get any faster because of it's optimization. It get's faster becuase the CPU speed is increasing. That's what my friend thought anyway.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 17:23
Now that's interesting.
The security model has workarounds? Give me some links; I'd like to see them.
Other languages with virtual machines that integrate into web browsers? I'm always open-minded to new avenues. Tell me about some. I'll go look into them.
Hey, if there is a utility knife for general tasks out there that's a little bit sharper, I won't mind using it.
As things stand however, java is the only language that fits the bill for many of my programming tasks. I'm perfectly willing to use it until I find something else, and I'm not interested in any of that 'c/assembly is faster' or 'python is better structured'. I can't run python on a webpage and even if I could; it wouldn't make a darn bit of sense for me to completely start over on any of my projects unless there is some real benefit to doing so. As such, java makes it easy for me to port objects from program to program, on the web or on any operating system, with little trouble, reusing interfaces and classes. Until I get something that can allow me to do the same thing, more easily (not that concerned about speed,) then I really couldn't care about switching to anything else for non-time intensive tasks.
I use C++ at work. Maybe you only get really bitter about java until after you've been forced to use it?
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 19:32
>>115
You still don't get it, do you?
It's the API we hate! THE FUCKING API! It's WORTHLESS!
As well as the crappy language design. And the crappy bloated shit built around it in J2EE. And the sub-par garbage collector. And the sub-par platform (in)compatibility.
Working on Java is a pain in the arse and it's absolutely unproductive. It gets large projects to fail because it's a fucking nightmare.
>>118 I program in python
And you still like Java? Are we talking the same Python here?
>>120 why doesn't somebody do a compiler for all of these languages like python to compile to java bytecode
Because:
1. You don't know Jython.
2. Python requires the interpreter. You wouldn't be able to eval or do some things if you totally compiled it and got rid of the interpreter.
3. Java's VM is inferior.
4. If you're still going to bother writing a Python compiler, write a decent compiler. We don't want Python running on the Java VM. Either use another VM, or write a native x86 compiler.
>>123 I liked the idea of byte code and JIT, and all that crazy anti-hacker restrictions on java.
∧＿∧ fap fap
fap （ ´Д｀/"lヽ
/´ （ ,人）
fap （ ） ﾟ ﾟ| | ＜ Java is a fast, productive, secure enterprise solution!
＼ ＼__, | ⊂llll
＼＿つ ⊂llll
（ ﾉ ﾉ
| （__人_） ＼
Don't use java to write quake 5.
I wouldn't use Java to write Quake 5 because of it's piece of shit APIs, not because it'd be fucking slow.
Oh but are we still discussing speed? AHHH MOTHERFUCKERS I CAN'T STAND YOU! Oops. Well, I think speed is not the big bad deal of Java.
>>131 Other languages with virtual machines that integrate into web browsers?
Uh, have you any remote idea what are you talking about?
Hey, if there is a utility knife for general tasks out there that's a little bit sharper, I won't mind using it.
Java's API is not an utility knife. It's a stone carved Swiss army-like knife complete with a lava lamp and a cellular, weighting 180 Kg.
As things stand however, java is the only language that fits the bill for many of my programming tasks.
Do you write professional business solutions? If so, Visual Basic is an alternative.
I can't run python on a webpage and even if I could
Are you talking about Java applets? I hope not, they failed long ago. Java runs in the server side, so does Python.
java makes it easy for me to port objects from program to program
Welcome to structured or OOP programming, discovered some thirty years ago and found in any langauge today.
Maybe you only get really bitter about java until after you've been forced to use it?
You get really bitter about life after you've been forced to use Java.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 20:00
Other languages with virtual machines that integrate into web browsers?
1997 called. They want their shitty applets back.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 20:17 (sage)
Applets > stupid "AJAX" shit
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 20:20
Oh, don't tell me you've been defending Java to write one hundred line applets...
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-01 21:57
Well, I just have to write 100 lines of code because I can frickin' reuse my code, classes and interfaces, from everywhere else in that applet, because each was written in java.
Okay, before we go too off-track: Java is reviled by some programmers for:
1) Lack of pointers and direct programmer-memory interaction
2) Slowness, caused by:
2a) Overly specialized object hierarchy
2b) Overly complicated implementation
2c) Compiling and interpreting conversion
[Slowness by the GC is a new one. Never heard someone bring up that before.]
3) Extensive but convoluted GUI set-up
4) Limited class inheritance rules (extend 1 class, implement X interfaces)
Other points in this article remain contestable, but these are the basics.
One thing I don't recall us bringing up is a question of precedence: is there a language that does satisfactory OOP?
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 14:09
>>152
Smalltalk, CLOS and its brethren (Objective-C, TinyCLOS, Flavors, SCOOPS)
>>152 satisfactory OOP
I started to doubt such a thing exists a long time ago. Even if you can find a way to use OOP in a manner you find acceptable (and the language that offers such manner), you'd better be doing it in a solo project, because otherwise BEST PRACTICE faggots will shove their bureaucracy down your throat so hard you'll be shitting UML diagrams for a month.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 14:32
>>155
I work for Allstate and I'm currently on a team programing a UML compiler because my boss is an idiot.
>>152 Slowness by the GC is a new one. Never heard someone bring up that before.
Then you clearly know very little about Java performance. Why should we trust the rest of your post? In fact, GC thrashing is a huge factor in performance problems of many large-scale Java apps.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 18:36
Three years, and we still hold much the same opinions about Java. Some things just never change...
I heard the dot operator in the new java has been replaced by 8=================D and variable names can't be less than 50 characters (or the bus will explode)
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 22:26
"Our objective goals moving forward to the future of tomorrow is modelling scalable enterprise business solutions for the 21st century marketplace, using business-to-business networking and the world-wide superhighway. We hope to reinvigorate developers with our free floating API cloud-frameworks while also providing sustainable growth for investors today, and tomorrow."
-- Linus Torvalds, inventor of the java.net programmer's toolkit.
Go is a horrible language. It's made more horrible by the fact that a lot of substandard programmers use it, to the point where it's much much easier to generate total and utter crap with it. Quite frankly, even if the choice of Java were to do *nothing* but keep the Go programmers out, that in itself would be a huge reason to use Java.
-- Linus Torvalds
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-15 8:16
>>170
After reading the original rant, I gotta say, Linus would fit right in here at /prog/, especially because he opens it up with: *YOU* are full of bullshit.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-15 8:48
>>171
That is Linus's way of saying OK NOW YOU FUQIN ANGERED AN EXPERT PROGRAMMER
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-15 9:31
More Linus dick-swinging fun.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/57961 The very fact that you come in as a newbie, point to some absolutely *trivial* patches, and use that as an argument for a language that the original author doesn't like, is a sign of you being a person who should be disabused on any idiotic notions as soon as possible.
Oh snap!
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-15 9:38
>>171
Oh yes, this reminds me how I was trolling the anusman in the C tips thread.
>>181
What was the original email that was sent to Gerald Sussman? The one that started the unscientific and ultimately destructive meme.
We need to do the same for more people. RMS, Abelson, Linus Torvalds, even [spoiler]Mat Dickie[spoiler]. We'll have a /prog/ celebrity thread. Bring them all to our wonderful pit of cancer.