Normally I would agree with you, but Eclipse has made so many leaps
and bounds that it's just as (or really really close) easy to use.

Considering that a .NET user is stupid enough to post something
like that in a Java newsgroup, then one can have some doubts
about what .NET is going to destroy ...

Arne

Have you ever used Stackless Python, Scheme or encountred the concept
of generators or coroutines? You really need to adjust your frame of
thinking to get those things :)

That's correct! It's in fact a handicap. You won't be able to learn
from your errors if you can't admit that what you were wrong.

I think that the success of java attracts maniacs :). Fears and
hatered must be projected on Microsoft and VB :D not on java.

I like flames >:)

Adiaux
Samir

You surely are not claiming that Java is /not/ of archaic design ?   (In the
sense of "archaic" that the OP clearly meant -- lacking invaluable features
which have been commonplace in language design for many decades, and which a
few modern scripting languages are finally starting to catch up with).

   -- chris

It is entirely understandable that he should omit all mention of a third
category of language -- the ones that people complain about even if they
/don't/ use them.

(Other perenial favourites in this category: COBOL, VB, ...)

   -- chris

Python do not belong to any of those two categories :)

On Mar 12, 9:27 pm, "Chris Uppal" <chris.up...@metagnostic.REMOVE-
THIS.org> wrote:

Thank you for the information Chris, I've looked yesterday at Scala
and found it interseting. It's now on my Todo list :)

Adiaux
Samir

I love Java.

I don't require perfection, just utility. It has plenty of that.

It could be a mistake to malign VB. That's a pretty useful language also.

-- Lew

On Mar 13, 12:01 am, "gethostbyn...@gmail.com"
<gethostbyn...@gmail.com> wrote:

It takes "ages" to startup especialy on low ram machines. But, Java VM
takes no time to start from an ARM (they have native java bytecode
interpreter in their chips, and I like it :). I've read somewhere that
Sun have sacrificed size for the sake of speed :)

Outdated computers are the real test for any os/programming language.

Not that bad :). I think that multiple inheritance just requires more
attention and discipline when programming. Explicit deallocation of
memory is good thing to keep track of your RAM usage. I think that
most people will say that garbage collection is a bad thing when it
comes to a language like Java.

Like operator overloading?

Tried JRuby, didn't like it :(

I did some Ada in school. Cool programming language. I'll give jgnat a
try :)

As expected :)

Adiaux
Samir

You can do things with multiple inheritance that can never be done
with interface implementations alone.  Can it be abused? probably.
Does that justify tieing the programmers hands?  I would argue no.

I find the statement that "explicit deallocation of memory is a bad
thing" to be laughable.  It assumes that this MUST be done in C++.  If
you look at boost shared pointers and the like you will find that
object lifetime can be easily and, more importantly, predictably
managed.  There seems to be an implicit assumption in this rather
childish statement in the philosophy behind garbage collection that
memory is the only resource that must be managed.  File handles,
network connections, and other resources that are just as important to
manage and must be managed in a way that is more deterministic that
can be done by relying on garbage collection.  The result is that, if
you code a class in Java that must manage one of these resources, you
MUST add methods that allow the application to release the resources
and these MUST be invoked before the object reference is released.
So, tell me again,  how does GC really help here??

There are a lot of other "features" of Java that I find very
annoying.  Examples:

 - Lack of unsigned integer types.  I realise that, with two's
complement math, the math operations between signed and unsigned is
all the same.  However, I find that not being able to use unsigned
types results in sign extension in places where it was not expected
and results in casting/masking operations that only serve to clutter
the source code.

 - Bit shift operations only appear to be implemented for the integer
type.  The result:  if I am trying to do bit shifts on something
smaller than an integer, a byte or a short, the arguments are promoted
to integers and the reslt of the shift is an integer.  So in order to
assign that back to something smaller than an integer,  guess what,
yet another cast is needed.

Me measure of the "goodness" of a language or its implementation is
whether I can accomplish the task I set out to do without having to
fight the language or its implementation.  If I have to litter my code
with cluttering casts simply to produce the correct results or to
satisfy the childish demands of the compiler, I become annoyed.  If
the language hobbles me rather than allowing me to express the design,
it also becomes annoying.  My personal experience is that Java is
cluttered with these kind of issues.

It seems to be easy to forget that there are reasons for writing
programs that transcend the language or environment in which it is
developed.  At the end of the day, my value to my employer is not in
the languages I have mastered but in what I can produce that can solve
our customers problems and/or needs.  To the extent that the language
and/or environment facilitates that, it becomes a valuable tool.  To
the extent that the language/environment fetters that, it becomes less
valuable and less likely to be chosen as a tool.  No language or
environment is free from blemish.  Java has some real advantages but I
do not consider it a replacement for what can be done in C++.

   Indeed. I don't know why they don't start off with BASIC or some other
simple, imperitive language instead (simply don't teach the students the
"GOTO" keyword, and if they discover it via some other source, explain to
them that it's simply there for historical reasons, and its usage is
generally discouraged, and from then on, penalize their grades if it
starts showing up in their code).

   The imperivative paradigm is much easier to grasp than the OO one, and
starting off with a language like Java means you either have to jump right
into OO, thus confusing them terribly, or do a lot of handwaving over the
keywords "public", "class" and "static", and say "Just always make
everything public, and make all your methods static. I'll tell you why
next year. Oh, and the compiler will let you declare variables inside of
classes, but outside of methods. But don't do that. Always declare all
your variables inside of methods. At least until next year, where you'll
then need to start declaring variables in the classes, and outside of the
methods, and they won't be static anymore."

   Python (since it was mentioned several times in this thread) might
actually be a good beginner language, though I've never met anyone whose
first language was Python, so I don't have any empirical evidence to back
up this theory.

[...]

   While I've written a few simple apps in Python (mainly for coursework
back when I was in university), I don't know enough Python to have ever
encountered any backwards-incompatibility issues. Have you also used PHP?
Is it worse than the PHP4-PHP5 transition?

   - Oliver