11–20 of 57 posts
It's not really about the technology, it's about the hook. I also started using Java when it came out, and there were two main hooks for us C/C++ coders: - write once, run anywhere. - write programs that run on web browsers (applets). Today, it could be: "I want to write an Android app, and Google just released this new Java language/platform that I have to use." In other words, any new language can make it if a larg…
All modern languages and all current iterations of the older languages are vastly superior by every imaginable metric.
All those 1.0s from the past would look like someone's toy project, because, well, that's what they were.
Not sure how that can be answered. How would it compete against C#, which is basically Java++, and now open source and cross platform, and mature? But C# doesn't exist without Java, which it was heavily influenced by. Scala runs on the JVM. Does Scala exist if Java is "introduced now"? Scala is also a Java++. I mean, Java was such a major influence that you have to stipulate how we deal with the fact that Java couldn…
Java was a hit in the enterprise because it had static typing, modules etc and was a complete product (tooling, doc - and stewardship from a big and respected tech company, who was neutral). OO helped, fashion-wise. C# and objective-C are the most similar languages today - but notwithstanding MS very recent moves, both are wedded to a proprietary company.
But if Java was introduced today, it would have a difficult fight against Go: Go is similar, and with Google's neutral backing, would have taken Java's role. Or maybe languages which Java displaced: delphi, ada, etc.
The realistic answer is: if java hadn't existed, something that met those needs would have been drawn forth by the demand.
Honestly, as it currently stands, Java appears to me as merely a pared down version of C#. C# shares nearly all of the same major features, while adding in more useful ones like properties and Linq, plus the promise of many new features on the horizon, like the null propagating operator. All of those, plus the rest of Microsoft's development ecosystem, make it a much nicer language overall. The only reason I don't th…
A far bigger factor is that C# is (or at least was) Windows only.
Honestly, as it currently stands, Java appears to me as merely a pared down version of C#. C# shares nearly all of the same major features, while adding in more useful ones like properties and Linq, plus the promise of many new features on the horizon, like the null propagating operator. All of those, plus the rest of Microsoft's development ecosystem, make it a much nicer language overall. The only reason I don't th…
Not at all. Java's rise was the perfect storm of several factors: object orientation taken to its logical conclusion during a huge IT hype period for it (much like "Big Data" today), the tail end of a huge explosion of CPU architectures which made VMs very attractive, and CPU power finally getting to the point where pervasive garbage collection wasn't a detriment to large systems. The platform as we have today is sim…
Oh, how I wish. OO was never taken to its logical conclusion in the mainstream at all. Java's Nygaard-style OO was just a sugar coating on top of a generic procedural paradigm and a far cry from Smalltalk's example that was set over 20 years prior. Ironically, much of the JVM's early optimizations were born out of research into the Self VM - a prototype-based OO Smalltalk environment.
Yet thanks to C++ and Java's object models following the Simula legacy becoming so firmly entrenched into the mainstream as the OO, today the entire paradigm has become disgraced and is outright reviled in some circles (how many times have I seen FP enthusiasts jump every time it's mentioned...)
The Smalltalk and Self communities are minuscule. A more recent addition was the Io language, but that too is very small. OO died before it could really shine, though the Smalltalkers' legacy did somewhat live on as they went on to establish many of the software development methodologies and maxims that are taken for granted today.
Oracle's API architects are concerned with selling as much WebLogic licenses as possible however, so don't expect changes soon. However, the community has come up with some absolutely brilliant libraries where Oracle has clung to legacy technology.
All in all, it's a superb language with a bright future. Maybe we'll get better leadership as Oracle is forced out of the closed source era (it's happening at Microsoft, so don't laugh).
Java brought programming to a higher standard with clear syntax, easy of use and a much faster learning curve than languages up to that point. That paradigm gave rise to new languages like Javascript and new designs for large scale software.
So, I think it's irrelevant if Java would make it if introduced today since I am not sure today would be here (or at least in its current form) without Java.
Not sure how that can be answered. How would it compete against C#, which is basically Java++, and now open source and cross platform, and mature? But C# doesn't exist without Java, which it was heavily influenced by. Scala runs on the JVM. Does Scala exist if Java is "introduced now"? Scala is also a Java++. I mean, Java was such a major influence that you have to stipulate how we deal with the fact that Java couldn…
Agreed. If Java hadn't existed until now, it's entirely unclear what languages would be popular or even exist. Hell, would object oriented programming be popular, or would it be a niche paradigm?