Understanding is Everything - Peter Lord
Can someone justify or simplify this
SCEA 5 (part 1), SCBCD, SCWCD, SCJP, CLP, CLS
Pratik mhta wrote:I have just started to learn java and i am hearing from people that java has no future scope because it is slow and asp.net , php , c# would be in use at large , Can someone justify or simplify this
David Newton wrote:
Pratik mhta wrote:I have just started to learn java and i am hearing from people that java has no future scope because it is slow and asp.net , php , c# would be in use at large , Can someone justify or simplify this
There are so many things wrong with that.
Java is *very* fast. It has one of the best virtual machines ever made with *very* good optimization. PHP is (mostly) garbage, and as far as I'm concerned, has no place doing real work when *so* many better options exist. (Of course it's usable, and a lot is done with it--that doesn't mean it's a good choice, though.)
It's also important not to confuse Java-the-language with Java-the-ecosystem. Java-the-language has some issues (in my opinion), some of which may be addressed by Java 7. Java has *very* good development tools, and unlike .NET, there are more than two implementations (IF you count Mono as a complete implementation). The JVM has some of the best languages running on it (although F# is quite good as well).
Understanding is Everything - Peter Lord
David Newton wrote:There's too much to list. But Java-the-ecosystem is the JVM, Java itself, and the huge number of libraries available to do nearly everything. J2ME (as you mention) and JEE (enterprise Java) are two chunks of it.
Understanding is Everything - Peter Lord
David Newton wrote:That is not enough of a problem statement for anyone to be able to help.
Understanding is Everything - Peter Lord
Due to the complexity of java go language was introduced !! by google.
David Newton wrote:(Well, in all fairness, it *was* pretty slow when it first came out.)
Understanding is Everything - Peter Lord
Arun Giridharan wrote:Due to the complexity of java go language was introduced !! by google............................[god knows what complexity !!]
Pratik D mehta wrote:Java runtime environment is the the Java virtual machine ?
What does java plugin do ?
Do you have a source which confirms this? I don't think Google came out with Go because they thought Java was too complex. I don't think Go has anything to do with Java at all.
David Newton wrote:As far as it being a "systems implementation language" thus not related to Java... I don't get that, as it seems to be a pretty high-level, dynamic-like-but-static language suitable for implementing just about anything.
Pat Farrell wrote:They did, in that talk, discuss that the complexity of current Java (which I took to mean the language and the common libraries and the libraries you need to include to do common stuff like talking to a remote HTTP server) driving them for a simpler design.
And until they hacked in the reflection support, it lacked support for a lot of the idioms that are in constant use in systems work. (returning functions to execute)
So if I was given a clean sheet requirement to implement a RDBMS (which I did in Bliss 30 years ago), I would look long and hard at go and only consider Java for the implementation.
David Newton wrote:the word "systems" may be throwing me off
David Newton wrote: that you'd only implement an RDBMS in Java? Other than Go not actually being done, what in the language would lead you to believe Java is a better choice?
Pat Farrell wrote:The term is not used as much today as it was decades ago. I use it, as it was, to mean "systems tools" like compilers, linkers, editors, grep/find. Things used by programmers, not applications used by consumers.
Any DBMS built today would have to be designed for huge numbers of core processors, and large numbers of servers made up of lots of those multi-core chips. I've written in many threads here on the Ranch that I don't think Java' current threading model is scalable.
I'm trying (and failing) to say that given a clean slate, I would not pick Java to implement the next great DBMS. Not today. And I would not have Java at the top of my list if I was implementing a new compiler for a new language. I think that Java would be a poor choice.
Any DBMS built today would have to be designed for huge numbers of core processors, and large numbers of servers made up of lots of those multi-core chips. I've written in many threads here on the Ranch that I don't think Java' current threading model is scalable.
Deepak Bala wrote:As for the thread scalability thing, I believe you advocate Scala ? How would it compare to 'go' ?
Do you have a source which confirms this? I don't think Google came out with Go because they thought Java was too complex. I don't think Go has anything to do with Java at all.
Arun Giridharan wrote:
Do you have a source which confirms this? I don't think Google came out with Go because they thought Java was too complex. I don't think Go has anything to do with Java at all.
On the launch of go language ......it was said go will override the complexity of java.
Arun Giridharan wrote:On the launch of go language ......it was said go will override the complexity of java.
InfoWorld wrote:One member of the audience, Larry Augustin, the CEO of customer relationship management software provider SugarCRM, agreed with Pike's assessment that C++ and Java have gotten too complex, although he noted that this typically happens with all languages as they grow to meet a wider range of use cases.
"The reason that these languages have grown in complexity is because the more they are used, the more errors and ambiguities we've found, and the attempts to remove those ambiguities and errors have created something more complex," said Augustin, who has a background in software engineering and programming language design.
"I appreciate his goal," he said of Pike's efforts. "The question is can he achieve his target result? or does Go [become more complex] as more people use it," Augustin said.
Jesper Young wrote:Strange. Especially because Rob Pike says it, because he's not some management bobo who doesn't really know any technical stuff.
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:
InfoWorld wrote:One member of the audience, Larry Augustin, the CEO of customer relationship management software provider SugarCRM, agreed with Pike's assessment that C++ and Java have gotten too complex, although he noted that this typically happens with all languages as they grow to meet a wider range of use cases.
"The reason that these languages have grown in complexity is because the more they are used, the more errors and ambiguities we've found, and the attempts to remove those ambiguities and errors have created something more complex," said Augustin, who has a background in software engineering and programming language design.
"I appreciate his goal," he said of Pike's efforts. "The question is can he achieve his target result? or does Go [become more complex] as more people use it," Augustin said.
Deepak Bala wrote:Verbosity != Complexity
Don't get me started about those stupid light bulbs. |