Michael B Allen wrote:
I also agree with you about all the "junk". C# and Java both suffer
the "fluffy programming" problem. The number of classes and half-baked
attempts at OO abstractions is unnecessarily complex and nonuniform.
The number of C# assemblies is staggering. Why does logging in Java
need 17 classes with all sorts of complex OO relations? That's just
ridiculous.
It's enterprise-itis, and it's not the fault of the language.
Unfortunately, companies like Sun and Microsoft will hire people who
have systems programming experience but no real experience with the
problem domain to develop tools. Requirement #1 is putting as many
acronyms in the marketing material as possible. Requirement #2 is
making it possible to interface with a large number of legacy system
that ought to be taken behind the shed and shot. Security,
Reliablity, Performance and developer convenience rank somewhere around
Requirement #19482. You'd get very different results if the system was
written by a battle hardened IT sysadmin rather than a couple of college
kids and Bangalore Bangers headed up a product manager hired away from a
breakfast cereal company.
ColdFusion, ASP.NET and other commercial web systems appear to be
built by smart people who'd never built web applications. If they'd
hired people who'd spent a decade writing webapps, they'd understand
the unwritten standards behind web sites that work. However, people
who know how to build webaps and do systems work are busy.
_______________________________________________
New York PHP User Group Community Talk Mailing List
http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
