Earlier quoted context omitted.
To further that point, JavaScript is more similar to Scheme if anything.
Even more ridiculous is that JavaScript and Java are the same age.
So, you could ask: Would JavaScript make it if introduced today?
Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
51–57 of 57 posts
Re: Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
OOP gained momentum in the late 80s and early 90s. Before we were programming in Java, many of us were using...C++. OOP might have been different, but it would probably still be dominant.
Java did a lot to strengthen the C++ style static dispatch branch of OO. The Smalltalk/Python/Objective-C school of OOP might have fared a lot better of there was no type safe language in the opposing camp.
Re: Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
OOP gained momentum in the late 80s and early 90s. Before we were programming in Java, many of us were using...C++. OOP might have been different, but it would probably still be dominant.
Java did a lot to strengthen the C++ style static dispatch branch of OO. The Smalltalk/Python/Objective-C school of OOP might have fared a lot better of there was no type safe language in the opposing camp.
The dynamic branch of OOP actually fared pretty well in Python, javascript, ruby, even in the presence of Java. As to why the others faltered (objective C being popular just because of Apple, smalltalk always being niche), I can't really say.
Re: Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
#54Instead of answering the question, I'd like to point out how different the world of programming might look today WITHOUT Java. Java was the first maintstream GC language (no more malloc), fully object oriented and the first byte code based VM language. Prior to Java, you were either writing in interpreted languages like Perl or in C/C++. Java brought programming to a higher standard with clear syntax, easy of use and…
> the first byte code based VM language UCSD pascal would like to have a word with you. Circa 1980 > fully object oriented and the first byte code based VM language. Smalltalk would like to have a word with you. Circa 1984 > Java was the first maintstream GC language Basic (in all its variations) would like to have a word with you. Circa 1968; And perhaps it is going to bring along its buddies Lisp (1958?) and APL (1…
You think we'd be better off with Python, a non-typed language against a typed language?
Really, I like Python, but speed as well as typing is lacking.
I'm glad we have both languages.
Re: Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the first byte code based VM language UCSD pascal would like to have a word with you. Circa 1980 > fully object oriented and the first byte code based VM language. Smalltalk would like to have a word with you. Circa 1984 > Java was the first maintstream GC language Basic (in all its variations) would like to have a word with you. Circa 1968; And perhaps it is going to bring along its buddies Lisp (1958?) and APL (1…
You think we'd be better off with Python, a non-typed language against a typed language? Really, I like Python, but speed as well as typing is lacking. I'm glad we have both languages.
I'm referring to the hypothetical situation in which Java did not come along, not to modern Java vs. modern Python.
Yes, I think we'd have been better off with Python + C++ (which is likely had Java not come along).
w.r.t Speed - one of the reasons Python's speed is (still) lacking, is because it never got the amount of work Java did. JavaScript is no longer lacking in speed, and neither does Lua - and both are as dynamic as Python. Lua is much more impressive in this respect - LuaJIT's speed, the work of one person, is comparable to the best JavaScript engines, works of multiple big multiperson teams.
The original Java was a little safer than Python, but definitely not on par with what you'd consider a modern staticly typed language. There were no generics, and everything was cast all around e.g. if you used a dict/map container. It was easy to have static typing locally, but not globally. The standard library at the time was really, really bad. I think I considered it acceptable only with Java 1.5.
A lot of modern Java is like it is because it was in widespread use, and it was so bad to begin with. Had it been Python instead, perhaps Python's bad parts would have been addressed earlier (including lack of type checking and lack of speed - both of which are coming of age)
Re: Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
#56Re: Ask HN: Would Java make it if introduced today?
#57Honestly, 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…
Isn't Silverlight effectively dead for new development? I know it won't even run in Chrome any more, and it's been several years since Microsoft issued any updates.
Yes, but after the most recent Chrome update, that's just about as functional as Java applets are.