Java stinks as a programming language

[SuperDemocrat]

I know how to program in Java and I can say it is the most useless language every developed. It is suppose to be platform independent but it really just has an interpreter for every system. It is a novel idea but it stinks for the average user because the average user is to computer illiterate to understand how to use the JVM. Give me a real .exe anyday.

The other issue is that it attempts to be a pure object oriented language and I hate that. It feels so passive. I just want commands to make the computer do what I want it to do. Objects just feel passive and what can you do with passive? If I want the computer to do something it doesn't make sense to me to use passive objects to get it to do something. I want it commands to make it do something. It feels so much more powerful than objects.

 

[alpine]

it is good for server applications, rather than consumer applications

 

[Wuwei]

Yes, Java has a steep learning curve, but it was worth it to me. It takes a couple of years to get real comfortable with it. I found it much superior to C++. I have been using it for over 12 years in AI.

As far as consumer applications Java is the language for the Android. If you can bear to go through with it prepare for lots of cursing and rage.

One application in recursive mapping was heavy double precision floating point and I found that the compiled code could run at a sustained 2.2 GFlops on a single thread. It went through over 1 trillion ops in about 8 minutes. I was absolutely surprised that the compiler could do that. The processor runs at 2.6 GHz.

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Yes, Java has a steep learning curve, but it was worth it to me. It takes a couple of years to get real comfortable with it. I found it much superior to C++. I have been using it for over 12 years in AI.

As far as consumer applications Java is the language for the Android. If you can bear to go through with it prepare for lots of cursing and rage.

One application in recursive mapping was heavy double precision floating point and I found that the compiled code could run at a sustained 2.2 GFlops on a single thread. It went through over 1 trillion ops in about 8 minutes. I was absolutely surprised that the compiler could do that. The processor runs at 2.6 GHz.

The pure object oriented approach kind of forces me into a mindset I don't like which is passive. C/C++ has functions as well as objects which allows you to created objects to be manipulaited by those functions. I feel it is a little more versatile and accomodating to people's styles.

 

[Wuwei]

I understand what you mean about being forced. I don't know what you mean by passive. Both Java and C++ express their GUI functions as object oriented which forces you to understand them. I found you can always write function-like constructions if you make them static. I needed a lot of misc functions and didn't want to make all kinds of classes for them so I made one static class called G. I could put my functions there. If you had a histogram program you could call G.histo(data). If you wanted to print an array it is G.arrayPrint(data). It looks a bit more awkward than C.

I am not trying to talk you into Java, there are lots of different languages and no one language is "best" for everyone.