aspose file tools*
The moose likes Beginning Java and the fly likes Worried about java Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login


Win a copy of Java 8 in Action this week in the Java 8 forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Beginning Java
Bookmark "Worried about java" Watch "Worried about java" New topic
Author

Worried about java

V Aravind
Greenhorn

Joined: Jul 20, 2010
Posts: 3

What you say is not true. Java is a language found to address real world applications. Thats the plus point in java. Moreover Java is very fast and less complicated when compared to C++. More development tools have been designed using Java. There is no way that java has less scope in software industry
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Nothing you have said addresses anything I said: I never said it wasn't used, I never said it wasn't less complicated than C++ (in fact I said it *was* less complicated), or that it had less scope. I also said it was fast--but it used to be as slow or slower than Smalltalk. I have very specific issues with Java--if you want to address those, okay, but stick to things I actually said.
Richard Golebiowski
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2010
Posts: 213

20 years ago they were saying that programmers would not be needed soon.
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Richard Golebiowski wrote:20 years ago they were saying that programmers would not be needed soon.

And most people that knew anything laughed at that too.
Jesper de Jong
Java Cowboy
Saloon Keeper

Joined: Aug 16, 2005
Posts: 13884
    
  10

Richard Golebiowski wrote:20 years ago they were saying that programmers would not be needed soon.

When my dad started working as a COBOL programmer, around 1970 (40 years ago!) there were already people telling him there wouldn't be much future in being a programmer, because programming languages would soon become so sophisticated and easy to use that business people would just be able to tell the computer what to do.
goitya potiya
Greenhorn

Joined: Aug 19, 2005
Posts: 22
Richard Golebiowski wrote:20 years ago they were saying that programmers would not be needed soon.


True, atleast in my view. With the kind of outsourcing and off-shore development atleast programmers would not be needed in developed countries..... soon.

Pat Farrell
Rancher

Joined: Aug 11, 2007
Posts: 4639
    
    5

Another cool language:
Three cool things about D

D claims to be the next thing after C or C++

Designed from the start for concurrency and correctness.

On "programmers are no longer needed": Right. I'm holding my breath. That claim has been made every year since Von Neumann. I am not impressed with the "improvements" that have been made to programming and programming languages in this century. Where is the creativity? Where is the leap in productivity?
Gregg Bolinger
GenRocket Founder
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Posts: 15292
    
    6

Here's my biggest problem with Java and teaching it to someone new to programming:



The learner barely knows what a class is, let alone static anything. Then there's the worst example of method naming in println. I hate when people leave out vowels. And it's not even camel cased correctly.


GenRocket - Experts at Building Test Data
Gregg Bolinger
GenRocket Founder
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2001
Posts: 15292
    
    6

I think part of the lack of innovation is because of the web. While web development can be intricate and there are obviously exceptions to what I'm about to say, for the most part, web development isn't difficult and most often trivial. Frameworks have taken over where languages should have progressed.
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Pat Farrell wrote:Where is the creativity? Where is the leap in productivity?

You don't see Clojure, for example, as a move forward? Even Scala is a step in the right direction.

The leap in productivity has more to do with the developers than the languages and environments anyway, and that's always been the case.
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Gregg Bolinger wrote:Here's my biggest problem with Java and teaching it to someone new to programming:


Fixed.

Java's a poor language for encouraging organic exploration.
Arun C. Giridharan
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2010
Posts: 96
Oh! i can't accept that .
Deepak Bala
Bartender

Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 6657
    
    5

David Newton wrote:Nothing you have said addresses anything I said: I never said it wasn't used, I never said it wasn't less complicated than C++ (in fact I said it *was* less complicated), or that it had less scope. I also said it was fast--but it used to be as slow or slower than Smalltalk. I have very specific issues with Java--if you want to address those, okay, but stick to things I actually said.


I am not sure if Aravind was talking about your post. Perhaps he was agreeing with you while addressing the OP's question

Oh! i can't accept that .


Accept what ?

Depends on what you mean: verbosity is most certainly one type of complexity. The more there is to take in the more cognitive overhead there is. The more the problem is being obscured by the solution the more cognitive overhead there is.

One of Java's greatest weaknesses (to me) is that every solution looks like Java--not like the problem I'm trying to solve. This is somewhat alleviated by static imports, foreach, etc. but remains wrecked by reflection and lack of first-class functions. Workarounds require enough additional code to make the tradeoff questionable.


Yes my thoughts are pretty much aligned with your comments. Less verbosity while using foreach loops is good. There are cases where less verbosity is not desirable. EJBs during their initial days were very verbose. Many classes and a confusing deployment model. Code in general can also be made verbose by writing everything in the same method. This is why I try to split the method calls to chunks. For example I try to use descriptive method calls that do minute tasks instead of writing the code inline. I like to write code as though it reads like a story.



Something like that. One could argue that writing many small methods makes the code more verbose. The other way to look at it is that the method names make it easier to understand what is going on.


SCJP 6 articles - SCJP 5/6 mock exams - More SCJP Mocks
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Deepak Bala wrote:[One could argue that writing many small methods makes the code more verbose.

But it couldn't be argued very well, since the number of moving parts is nearly identical.
Deepak Bala
Bartender

Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Posts: 6657
    
    5

David Newton wrote:
Deepak Bala wrote:[One could argue that writing many small methods makes the code more verbose.

But it couldn't be argued very well, since the number of moving parts is nearly identical.


Yep. The only difference would be the extra lines that would define each method, which is justifiable to support the positive outcome of improved code readability. I have had some folks ask me why I have so many private methods inside some of my classes.
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Arun Giridharan wrote:Oh! i can't accept that .

Accept what? That Java isn't a good language for organic exploration?! If so, you'll need to back that up with something other than simple disagreement, and figure out a way to refute common sense and experience. Java is a *terrible* language for exploration, because it takes too long to explore, and there's too much ceremony. In a language with a REPL people can just *begin*. With Java there's *way* more to it just to get *started*, let alone doing anything useful.

Try this experiment: drop a kid in front of a computer and tell him to start having fun in a Java environment. Now tell him to start having fun with, say, Logo. Now go off and read the studies of using Logo in the classroom and check out what *kids* are doing, then tell me how much luck they'd have doing the same thing in Java. Then perhaps you'll understand what I'm trying to say.

Ever see Why's Ruby-based interactive learning environment? That's just Ruby. In order to even get close with Java you need to go with something like BlueJ, and even that is targeted at high school and college age students. Java is neither designed, nor appropriate, for introductory programming instruction. Nor advanced programming instruction, because you simply cannot *teach* some concepts with it that you can with many other higher-level languages.
Pratik D mehta
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 29, 2010
Posts: 121

Jesper Young wrote:

Java the language is not very complicated at all, and it's much simpler than C++ (which does have a lot of intricate pitfalls). I don't see the need for a language that's "simpler" than Java. If it's not the language itself he's talking about, but the ecosystem around it (with the thousands of libraries and frameworks) - that's what I regard one of the greatest strengths of Java: you can get a library or framework for anything, and you often have choice between multiple implementations.

If Go would ever become popular, then it will grow as well, new language features will be added and lots of people will be writing libraries and frameworks in it, and after a while it will be just as "complex" as Java. I see that I'm not the only one with this idea:



I agree with jesper young , Java was meant to be object oriented for solving real world problem and real world things are organic and they keep on developing as situations arise , so I think java has many things ie it is complex and same will be the process with go , it will grow .


Understanding is Everything - Peter Lord
Arun C. Giridharan
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 11, 2010
Posts: 96
David Newton wrote:
Arun Giridharan wrote:Oh! i can't accept that .

Accept what? That Java isn't a good language for organic exploration?! If so, you'll need to back that up with something other than simple disagreement, and figure out a way to refute common sense and experience. Java is a *terrible* language for exploration, because it takes too long to explore, and there's too much ceremony. In a language with a REPL people can just *begin*. With Java there's *way* more to it just to get *started*, let alone doing anything useful.

Try this experiment: drop a kid in front of a computer and tell him to start having fun in a Java environment. Now tell him to start having fun with, say, Logo. Now go off and read the studies of using Logo in the classroom and check out what *kids* are doing, then tell me how much luck they'd have doing the same thing in Java. Then perhaps you'll understand what I'm trying to say.

Ever see Why's Ruby-based interactive learning environment? That's just Ruby. In order to even get close with Java you need to go with something like BlueJ, and even that is targeted at high school and college age students. Java is neither designed, nor appropriate, for introductory programming instruction. Nor advanced programming instruction, because you simply cannot *teach* some concepts with it that you can with many other higher-level languages.



IF you have better imagination ..... please let us know ! !
David Newton
Author
Rancher

Joined: Sep 29, 2008
Posts: 12617

Arun Giridharan wrote:IF you have better imagination ..... please let us know ! !

I have no idea what you're saying. If you have counter-examples, counter-studies, or anything to add, please feel free to do so.
 
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
 
subject: Worried about java
 
Similar Threads
i love java
Crypted Strings in a file
hi, i have problem in reading data
What java methods to use?
Why we choose java?