DAAAH JAVA I HATE you

[md]

QuantumPhysics @ 2012-09-05, 6:00 pm wrote:

md @ Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:27 pm wrote:

Stop complaining and learn Java. Use eclipse at home, choose an interesting project for the semester and go nuts. Or, learn C++ on your own at home using the same method. There is no reason to let a bad teacher (or just one who doesn't teach what you want to be taught) stop you from learning.

Please regard that - I know C/C++ to their full potential. I know java aswell. I just hate it.

The world is too small to hate a language, might as well learn to embrace it - hence the choosing a project for the semester and going nuts. Though, for the record I'd complain bitterly and possibly take the issue to the administration (especially if you have lots and lots of documented proof).

[Tony]

The thing is that if you "know C/C++ to their full potential", then you are not going to learn anything new at the high school level. The class would be preoccupied with debugging their out-of-bounds errors and segfaults. The truth is that the pace of a high school class is set by min(school_guidelines, average_student); and even at the University level, the bulk of CS majors have trouble being comfortable with pointers*.

Doing this class in either language will be about as easy. Though once you are proficient enough at C++, doing a few months of Java will make you a better C++ programmer, then doing the same number of months with trivial tasks in C++. Reason being is that Java encourages a somewhat different way of thinking about problems. You might not like the language as a whole, but given enough chance, you could pick out just the best parts, and bring them back to your C++ coding.

* I once had a job offer, seemingly based on the fact that I could competently answer questions about pointers in code.

P.S. being able to talk well about the differences between C++ and Java make you look really really good in just about any technical interview.

[wtd]

I'd just like to add that you aren't allowed to hate Java until you know it well.

[QuantumPhysics]

wtd @ Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:29 am wrote:

I'd just like to add that you aren't allowed to hate Java until you know it well.

Well, from what I have learned here is I WILL have to learn it before I can hate it. Thanks.

[mirhagk]

Went to the first comp sci meeting at my university last week and somebody mentioned Java and half the group just about screamed at how terrible the language was lol. I didn't think it was that bad, as it's better than some alternatives IMO, but they hated it.

I haven't used Java lately, but is it still horrendously slow? That seemed to be the general consensus, but after working C# (which is supposed to be working the same way, JIT byte code) and seeing the speed difference be negligible to C++, I assumed Java would be the same. One person brought up the question "Name 1 decently written application written in Java" and I was kinda stuck. It's obvious when software is written in Java, yet the only application I could actually mention was minecraft, which is (well at least was when I played it) one of the worst written games out there. The game is great, but even with just about a day of coding I came up with better algorithms than minecraft used allowing more blocks, farther render distances and higher quality textures, even including normal maps for some non-blockiness included.

[DemonWasp]

Java hasn't been slow since JIT was introduced, in version 1.4 (a decade ago). It's not quite C++ fast, but very few languages are (especially those that prevent you from shooting yourself in the foot / opening gaping security holes with a typo / crashing the system). I suppose if you insist on writing Java 1.3 that you will probably not have a good time when you compare it with modern everything else.

Most of the decently-written applications in Java aren't for the desktop, they're for servers. You don't "see" them because you just interact with them through a browser. You'll never know what's really running on that server unless the admins tell you (or, it's made obvious by a .php in the url or whatever).

MineCraft is not especially well-written. It is worth noting that, even though it's poorly written, it does have the distinct advantage that it runs on a LOT of devices "out of the box", which was part of the sell of Java.

Eclipse is some pretty great software, written entirely in Java, that runs on the desktop. It's not the fastest IDE, but it is one of the most flexible, powerful IDEs available.

[2goto1]

DemonWasp is 100% correct. Students can't name many Java applications because commercial Java programs are not in a space that students are normally familiar with. Java runs tons of commercial stuff as server side applications. Java in a desktop and applet spaces has very little market share, and I can understand why students would not be impressed.

One of my favourite discount brokers is interactivebrokers. Not to pitch them at all, but their trading platform "GUI" is entirely Java. It works flawlessly and efficiently.

For a discount broker they have invested a great deal into making a fabulous Java front end. It even provides a proprietary API for developers to integrate with through their Java front end.

Not that that's why I selected them as my broker of choice - their low rates were the basis for my choice - their Java platform was just a very pleasant surprise.

[md]

Crashplan is a very good consumer-level backup program written entirely in Java (though you likely wouldn't know it).

A well designed program shouldn't make it obvious which language it was written in, so how would anyone know if they were using Java apps?

[mirhagk]

well if someone uses the Java GUI instead of windows forms it's quite obvious, and you can tell by the dependencies. I think the opposite should be true of what you said. If someone doesn't know a program uses Java or .net before it's downloaded, then they either have to download it themselves after they try running/installing the software, or the software silently downloads frameworks (which is NOT a good thing).

Java is the last of the software that I install on a new PC, I always forget, and I rarely actually need it.

I've never seen Java really marketed well as a web platform, usually it's PHP or ASPX, with web software usually being ruby on rails.

While true that writing it in Java gives it access to lots of platforms, so do most modern languages.

[DemonWasp]

If someone uses Swing instead of OS-specific forms, it is usually noticeable. However, there's a lot of development based on SWT, which looks exactly like native controls (cross-platform, too) where available. An SWT application and a native application will generally look similar or identical, regardless of platform. You can see some of this effect in Eclipse, which looks native on all platforms.

There are some user-facing Java applications, though you rarely notice. For example Android is largely Java (well...Dalvik; it is Java but you can't call it "Java") for UI and application development.

If you've heard of Amazon EC2 or Jelastic, then you've heard of Java hosting. There's a surprising number of sites (both internal and external) operated by Java, and a fair bit of hard-core computation powered by things like Apache Hadoop.

[mirhagk]

Yeah I know android is Java based, it's actually one of the few criticisms I have for android, and I want to check out the native development kit but it specifically says not to use it unless you absolutely have to.

Even without the guess that a Java IDE would be written in Java I knew eclipse was written in Java. It's a very ugly IDE IMO, not that the look really matters, but most modern design philosophy conflicts with it. Also the toolbars and tabs don't look native at all and the icons they use look much more like the java GUI then a native one. I guess it's conceivable that a java app could be indistinguishable, but they are surely few and far between, because I usually don't need the java framework.

[Insectoid]

jdownloader is written in Java, and it's quite obvious. Same with Eclipse. Both also have annoyingly long start-up times but work fine once they're running. My main gripe with Java is its absurd verbosity.

[2goto1]

Every programming language should use one to two traditional Chinese characters for all operations, classes, methods. That would be enough to likely support any language and it's entire framework. No verbosity whatsoever!

In all seriousness, it is good to have a balance for readability, barrier to entry, etc.

[Zren]

Insectoid @ Mon Sep 10, 2012 9:05 pm wrote:

My main gripe with Java is its absurd verbosity.

Examples of this 'absurd verbosity'?

[wtd]

There can be only one really valid general criticism of Java, though it does especially apply in a learning environment.

Java is a lowest common denominator language in terms of programmer knowledge and capability. It aspires to nothing save mediocrity. It's obvious that there is a market for this, but I don't have to like that fact, nor should anyone who has bothered to register a username here.