why does java suck?

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.

Most people don't know what enterprise means. Especially the Ruby on Rails people. Mainly because they don't get real jobs.

>>41
Captain Jean Picard of the USS Enterprise.

Jean-LUC.

This thread is now about
Captain Jean-Luc Picard of the USS Enterprise.

>>41
Enterprise means writing a huge unmaintainable, slow Java web application with a terrible interface.

>>44
Thread hijack! Live long and prosper!

I recently learned that Captain Picard is also the Chancellor of the University of Huddersfield. Man I wish I had gone to that uni.

Java people don't get enterprise, only enterprisey

>>1

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.

| 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.

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.

>>51
Java 1.5 has generics.........by erasure, which means everything is still Object, and performance freaks will still go copypasta.

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?

Hello, >>53, allow me to explain:

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.

>>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

>>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).

>>56
Ha ha ha
gb2/java.com

No equivalent for large projects?

Hahaha, shit, that goes to show what you know.

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*

>>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.

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.

>>59
The KISS principle? GTFO you faggot.

Also, what languages besides C++ (and now Java) has support for generic programming?

>>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?

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.

>>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.

>>60
>>62
I guess you're 15 years old and write shitty games on SourceForge with the SDL?

>>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?

Satellites often use Forth you fucking idiot. Java? Jesus.

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.

you know a language is full of garbage when your program freezes for an hour to run the "garbage collector"

>>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).

>>67
Read my previous answer you fucking idiot.

>>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.

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.

>>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.

(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.

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?

>>73
you expect some company specialized in satellites, missiles and embedded software to tell you what they put in their products? looool

>>75
i would if i were considering buying their products...

>>75
Yeah, I would.

It's called marketing. Look it up.

>>76
>>77
You're posting on world4ch, you're poor, you're not a client, duh!

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!

>>79
Because
1) The ones that existed flopped so badly they removed all traces of it.
2) They no longer exist.