wispygalaxy wrote:
> Hadron wrote:
>
>> wispygalaxy <wispygalaxy@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> Gregory Shearman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2009-05-21, wispygalaxy <wispygalaxy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> Java is a popular language, and I hope it continues to have success.
>>>>> So
>>>>> many gadgets run Java. How can we live without it?
>>>>
>>>> Massive, bloated, clumsy. I can live without it.
>>>
>>> Do you like C++? I always see Java vs. C++ discussions.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with Shearman here.
>>
>> Java is a sloppy, slow mess.
>>
>> It got popular because they "cross platformed it" (or claimed it) early
>> enough to sucker people in. The great majority of "cross platform" Java
>> apps are still a mess with differnt ideas of what GUI to use and,
>> generally, the programmer have ZERO idea about efficiency.
>
> I've been interested in learning Java recently. I skimmed some books
> and decided that Java looked alright.
It isn't bad. It is even a very good general-purpose language.
Especially on linux, where you can count on it being present in a current
version, it is fine.
The problem is that on windows you can be relatively sure that no usable
java-runtime is present, and you need a big download to install it.
> It's used a lot in finance, which I'm
> majoring in. And my school teaches it extensively in CS classes.
>
> Have you tried out Java? Was it too slow for your taste?
It is not slow. Modern Java will compile the code while running it, so the
next time a function is accessed it will run fast. It will be slow only
the first time something executes.
Benchmarks have shown Java to be about as fast as C-apps or CPP apps, when
they have been compiled on the spot.
There are Audio- and Video-editors written completely in Java, and they
are everything but slow
> What kind of programming you do?
Java is useable in lots of things.
--
Windows isn't unstable. It's spontaneous.
|
|
