Why does Java suck so much?

Discussion in 'Programming & Software Development' started by one4spl, Jun 13, 2008.

  1. w00tsTyLeZ

    w00tsTyLeZ Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Messages:
    499
    Location:
    Canberra
    but the really important question here is what pays better, Java development or .Net development ?

    I have coded both but working as a .net dev right now. The langauge is growing enough that i find myself constantly learning new tricks, but could change teams if the money was worth while :)
     
  2. Luke212

    Luke212 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,058
    Location:
    Sydney
    ok there are two types of programmers. low level concepts are important for Tool Builders. ie Sewage Workers.

    The real movie-star programming is done by people who build off of existing tools and solve real world problems rather than programming problems.

    You cant have one without the other. I often find i have to do both roles. But i prefer the latter.
     
  3. choppa

    choppa Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2002
    Messages:
    2,503
    Location:
    Asia-Pacific
    Google uses Java almost exclusively for it's back end. Maps runs on Java, what is it now, a >1GB executable already? Runs nice.

    But they don't dare touch Java for client-side stuff (i.e. Applets) and for good reason. Java applets are horrid. Next time make sure you refer to applets and you won't start a shit-storm with the pedantic-police as above.

    A good web-interface should not use a Java Applet with the advent of crap like DHTML, Javascript, Php, Cgi, etc. Look at consumer-grade ADSL2 modems for an example of how responsive they can be... or even web servers built into high-end office printers. I don't get why they write Java Applet based interfaces for your particular device, but perhaps it's the easiest way they can make it interact with the hardware.
     
  4. Elyzion

    Elyzion Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Messages:
    7,449
    Location:
    Singapore
    YOUR A FUCKING UNI STUDENT, YOU DONT PROGRAM ANYTHING.

    Holy moly man when you get into the real world and realise 90% of what you learnt at uni doesn't apply in the real world your in for a massive shock.

    Seriously it's fine to have your input and help people on these forums, but what you know and what you think you know are two completely different things right now.
     
  5. phreeky82

    phreeky82 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    9,696
    Location:
    Qld
    You need "tool builders", they don't need you. From your posts I'd be willing to suggest that they're quite capable of doing your job but you're not capable of doing theirs.

    The fact that you call them "sewage workers" proves to me that you'd make a terrible CEO, and in fact proves you have a pretty poor knowledge of business.

    Oh and btw, as already stated, you're referring to an analyst, not a programmer.

    Exactly
     
  6. Bradzac

    Bradzac Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,744
    I highly doubt you have done anything "low level". You would have a lot more respect for the "sewage workers" and you wouldn't be talking the utter crap that you do.

    You've made it apparent that you DON'T understand basic fundamental concepts in the previous drivel you have posted here. This makes you a bad programmer.

    Tools can easily be built in any language. You think you're a .NET developer, go look at the GAT/GAX from MS P&P... unless it is too complex for you.

    I hate to break it to you Mr Movie Star but you're a C grade actor at best. It's people like you who call yourself a world class developer that make me want to go around and smash heads in with a baseball bat because you misguide the influential new developers who don't know any better.

    I can only assume you are a full time troll cus no one is that fucking stupid.
     
  7. Luke212

    Luke212 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,058
    Location:
    Sydney
    ok i think we have come to an understanding.

    btw i meant i want to be a movie-star/ceo type programmer (metaphorically), not actually a CEO... :) my public speaking and lying skills are not that great.
     
  8. syahrr01

    syahrr01 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,379
    Location:
    Padbury, WA 6025
    Fundamental concepts are sewage work?

    I think this exact attitude contributes to the problem outlined in the original post. Languages, IDE and tools come and goes. Fundamental and core concepts such as algorithm, data structures and memory management, however, does not change. In the industry, you're not considered a developer without the latter.
     
  9. Bradzac

    Bradzac Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,744
    Stay an academic. Forever. Please.
     
  10. Luke212

    Luke212 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,058
    Location:
    Sydney
    to continue the analogy, i know how a toilet works but i dont want to make one myself. simple as that.
     
  11. Bradzac

    Bradzac Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,744
    Fixed.....
     
  12. Luke212

    Luke212 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,058
    Location:
    Sydney
    hehe ok ...... :thumbup:
     
  13. Silenius

    Silenius Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    823
    It seems as if this thread has degenerated (unsurprisingly) into a religious war :p. This is surprising to me, because the differences between C++ and java are far lesser than, say, the differences between C++ and Haskell, or PHP and Scala, etc....

    (edit: I wrote greater rather than lesser. Funnily enough this accounts > 80% of my programming errors ;))

    Anyway, like most religious wars, most of the structured discussion has gradually disappeared ever since I made a rather simple claim... that C++ is more difficult than it needs to be... :). Nobody has really given concrete examples of pros and cons between languages. And quite a few people seem to be disdainful of those who prefer Java for being easier, as if an aversion to difficult tasks equates somehow to a weaker intellect. An easier tool is a superior tool, provided that it is equally adept.

    A bit of background: I've been programming in Java for approximately 4 months. I've had about 9 months of .NET experience (corporate world, yay.....) and for the rest of my programming life, I've coded mainly in C/C++. So actually, I'm much more familiar with C++ as it's my "first language", so to speak.

    Hmm. So it's definitely not that I know Java better -- because I don't ;). However, I definitely find Java easier.. because it is! My first Java program involved crafting iterative-mode DNS requests, parsing the responses and issuing queries to wherever they told me.. :). Looking at solutions written in C++, they were much more bloated, blowing up to hundreds of lines of code, complete trainwrecks of spaghetti and random segfaults.

    Actually, I'm complaining about things like heap corruption, which can rear its ugly head seemingly at random, at some odd point in time *after* corruption has taken place...

    The very presence of dangling references can also be frustrating. Most people don't understand why I complain about this: to them, the only alternative is something like Java where pointers don't exist. But there is a better way, unfortunately not built into C++ natively: boost pointers :).

    Threading...........................................
    Code:
    void* foo( void *ptr );
    char* d = "hi, lol\n";
    int thrd = pthread_create( &thread1, NULL, foo, (void*) d);
    
    (void*) d! :D. Java's implementation is much cleaner. Most of the dirty work is done in the JVM and Java actually contains syntactic structure for mulithreading (eg synchronized functions, synchronized blocks), as well as thread-safe containers and algorithms. Perhaps there's some inherent limitation to the JVM's implementation (don't confuse language limitations with JVM limitations - scala, for example, compiles to JVM bytecode and uses actors and msg passing to do this stuff, IIRC).


    There are a few other features I think C++ is missing - I'd really like list comprehensions (python), lambda abstractions (many many languages), constructors calling other constructors (java has this already), completely new OO model... although arguably that language would cease to be able to be called C++ ;). And there are a whole bunch of inconsistencies that need to be addressed as well as a bunch of other features currently under review, many of which will be incorporated into a new version of C++, C++0x (to be released in 200x).

    I like C++ because one can do things in C++ that nobody should ever do, or that nobody ever thought of doing. Prime example: template metaprogramming. Boost::spirit is the coolest example of this I've ever seen.

    When C++0x appears, it will make C++ into a somewhat more mature language..



    ..but it has problems. Java fixes some of them.



    edit: One thing that really gets to me about Java - no unsigned types. YE GODS, WHAT WERE THEY THINKING.
    edit2: Comparison semantics. .compareTo vs ==. Holy god, this shits me to tears. Mostly because of edit3:
    edit3: Operator overloading. Java needs it. It's the best feature of C++ and I can't do without it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2008
  14. phreeky82

    phreeky82 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    9,696
    Location:
    Qld
    It's easier where it's more suited. Which sure, is in a lot of applications, but not all.

    It's a massive generalisation. Massive generalisations when it comes to development tools gets to me, because it's a clear indication of the lack of somebodies ability to use the right tool for the job, rather than the one they know best.
     
  15. Silenius

    Silenius Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    823
    I'm not sure I understand, because I simply wouldn't use Java to do something for which it's unsuited.

    Implicit in my assertion that Java is easier is that Java is easier only for tasks for which it's intended. Maybe I should have made that clearer.
     
  16. phreeky82

    phreeky82 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    9,696
    Location:
    Qld
    Yes, which is clearly what I mean by my posts, including the ones you quoted, especially when you see my references to which tasks it is suited.

    My posts were in response to Luke212's indication that he thought low-level targetted languages were no longer of any importance.
     
  17. Silenius

    Silenius Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    823
    Oh okay - my bad.

    Personally, I wouldn't write a device driver in Java either. Although the idea of doing so excites me - if JVM wasn't so goddamn slow I really *would* do it.
     
  18. hyperstyle

    hyperstyle Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2003
    Messages:
    1,731
    Location:
    Brisbane
    breaking all your fingers would solve a real world problem.:weirdo::thumbup:
     
    Last edited: Jun 23, 2008
  19. Luke212

    Luke212 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2003
    Messages:
    10,058
    Location:
    Sydney
    outrageous. c++ it is more difficult than necessary is my argument. remember you jumped in half way? btw you are psycologically projecting.
     
  20. phreeky82

    phreeky82 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2002
    Messages:
    9,696
    Location:
    Qld
    Every language is more difficult than necessary, they could all have improvements made.

    The fact is that the "difficulties" you've mentioned were due to design aspects and are its positive attributes.
     

Share This Page

Advertisement: