Complex? Actually Java is a pretty simple language. Ruby/Python/
Scala/Groovy all have many more features and richer syntax than Java.
The APIs are overly complex. And these APIs set a precedent for
creating over-engineered super abstract solutions which unfortunately
most people followed. I mean so we really have to look at everything
as streams when a string will suffice 95% of the time? Or look at the
java mail API. Could you make the simple use case of sending a text
email any harder?
Verbose? Yep. I'll agree there..... in making java language
constructs simple, this resulted in quite a bit of verbosity (no
properties/events/closures/operator overloading/etc). It was an over-
reaction to C++'s complexity. Strip the language down to almost
nothing....
Not productive? I'll agree here too. Java the language is some of
the problem.... why in 2010 can't I do: String blah = "Hello $
{user.name}, your account ${account.number} is assigned.". why can't
we use String blah = ' "no need to escape my "s! ' and other little
things like that.... but these are just irritants really.
The real problem isn't java so much as it is all the frameworks. Ant
is an absolute abomination. XML is not a scripting language! How in
God's name did people blindly go down this path of using xml for
automation/builds? It has led to undebugable build hell, build.xml
files calling build.xml files calling build.xml files. It has led to
java trailing all other languages in automation.
Other problem frameworks : JSF (xml hell), Axis (ever hear of dynamic
binding? no, we must generate every stub - your time is not
important), OSGi (reduce coupling by making it impossible to get
anything done), Struts (could we have any more layers of indirection?)
I still have't found a java web framework I like, so I use rails. But
roo and play both look promising.... java needs more of this type of
approach IMO
On Jul 24, 3:06 am, Blanford <euroscript...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://developers.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=10/07/23/1838243
>
> I have wondered this for years, how Java could be the language of
> choice for web application design.
>
> Java is so much more complex and unproductive compared to a language
> like Python.
> This adds up to time and money.
>
> If I ran a business I would definitely use Java as little as possible.
>
> snydeq writes
> "Google distinguished engineer Rob Pike ripped the use of Java and C++
> during his keynote at OSCON, saying that these 'industrial programming
> languages' are way too complex and not adequately suited for today's
> computing environments. 'I think these languages are too hard to use,
> too subtle, too intricate. They're far too verbose and their subtlety,
> intricacy and verbosity seem to be increasing over time. They're
> oversold, and used far too broadly,' Pike said. 'How do we have stuff
> like this [get to be] the standard way of computing that is taught in
> schools and is used in industry? [This sort of programming] is very
> bureaucratic. Every step must be justified to the compiler.' Pike also
> spoke out against the performance of interpreted languages and dynamic
> typing."
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
