Re: The Revenge of the Geeks
On 1/23/2013 11:47 PM, BGB wrote:
On 1/23/2013 7:17 PM, Arne Vajh?j wrote:
On 1/23/2013 5:35 AM, BGB wrote:
On 1/23/2013 3:25 AM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
On 01/23/2013 02:21 AM, BGB wrote:
On 1/22/2013 11:33 PM, Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
Yes, it is a shame that Oracle runs Java but Sun wasn't so great
at it
either. Both pushed for high cost, high complexity "enterprise
edition"
libraries that come and go like fashion but dragged their feet on
streamlining the language itself.
much agreed...
the lack of "streamlining" of the core language is admittedly one
of my
bigger complaints about Java at present.
this is along with what few new features are added to the core
language
(and to the JVM) are IMO far too often via ugly hacks.
I'm not too worried about Java the language being close to stagnant, so
long as library development is up to par. Because if the solution I've
selected includes the JVM, then often Scala or Clojure are better
choices for high-productivity coding. Myself I don't care if Java the
language ever gets updated again - it's not important. The innovation
shifted away from Java the language years ago; there are better JVM
options now.
So I would disagree with both you and Kevin that "streamlining" the
core
language is all that important. You can't do enough of it to core Java
to make it worthwhile, without major changes. So why bother now? What's
important actually *are* those "high cost, high complexity EE
libraries", plus the later SE/EE-agnostic libraries like concurrency.
yes, but the lack of polish for the core language doesn't really make
using Java a particularly attractive option when contrasted against,
say, C++ or C#.
I don't think Java should worry about C++. For business apps, then
C++ is not really an option. And business apps is what Java is good
at.
some of us never go anywhere near business apps though...
Yes. But then Java may not be the obvious choice.
for example, I am mostly at-present a game developer, with side areas in
audio/video processing (writing codecs, ...), and am also into things
like compilers and scripting VM technology.
these are generally areas where C and C++ have a much stronger hold.
Yes.
Java is probably almost non-existing on the graphical side.
I believe some multi-player games use Java server side.
C# is a pretty good language.
in general, yes, it is ok.
its main selling points IMO are its reasonably fast compile times and
ease of quickly throwing together GUIs in WinForms, ...
WinForms was supplemented with a slight taste of replaced with
WPF 7 years ago.
90% of developer productivity is achieved by adept and informed use of
what other people have written: libraries.
potentially, but if a person can choose freely, all the major language
options have libraries. not necessarily all the same libraries, but
libraries none-the-less...
Maybe in the SE space, but not in the EE space.
AFAIK, Java EE costs money though, and I somehow suspect probably most
end-users have Java SE installed.
No - Java EE does not necessarily cost money. JBoss, Tomcat etc. can be
used for free.
Java EE is server side. Client side will typical be browser, but can in
theory also be a Java SE desktop app or a .NET/native desktop app.
but, in any case, with the other languages there are a wide range of
libraries available, many under fairly open licenses (like MIT or BSD),
and there is a lot more GPL stuff available,
In the EE space you would need to look at CORBA or DCOM.
You would prefer Java EE believe me.
:-)
Arne