Java

I think its headed for the shitheap because Oracle have been massive cunts and burned as many bridges as they can find.

The only hope is a move to open source the language/APIs, because Oracle sure as fuck isn't doing its fair share.

Its fine depending on what you are doing. A lot of web app backends are Java

I'm currently planning on working my way through Head First Java. Does anyone have any recommendations for a book or books that would be good to read after that? I already have the Gang of Four Design Patterns book which I seen recommended somewhere.

>>55791779
There is in fact OpenJDK

Somwhat subpar language paired with the GOAT standard library and the GOAT runtime. Gets criticized for all the wrong reasons by people who for some mysterious reason are still living in 2007.

>>55791822
Pluralsight has some online starter courses if you dont mind paying for a month

>>55791822
Just read the official docs on Oracle's website

>>55791862
It's relatively useless and you need a high IQ to make sense of it.

>>557918
STEP 1 : Buy a rope
STEP 2 : Leave all your wealth for me
STEP 3 : KILL URSELF BUT POST VIDEO HERE

>>55792030
wut

horrible, learned C++, after a few months started learning java and realized its made for techological illiterate people, it was incredibly easy to code with but was extremely ineficcient, unecesary cycles, not a proper variable management, and a bunch of trash left around.

Its made for small projects like a very specific program for a small company, the reason most android apps run like shit and consume a fuck ton of memory its because they are mostly based on java

>>55792094
>Its made for small projects

Everything in your post up to this point was facile and hand-wavey but this is just flat-out dumb and incorrect.

>>55791753
It's shit and Oracle has thrown malware in the Windows installer.

File: Jshit.jpg (210KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 1024x768px

>>55791753
It's SHIT

>>55791753
Decent language.

Still could use a GUI toolkit that is as well-designed as, say, QT, but within the standard distribution. All the existing GUI toolkits have various pretty annoying flaws.


Apart from that, syntax-wise I like Scala better. Oh sure, the language is not without its problems, but a lot of concepts and standard libraries are a lot less annoying than in Java.

>>55791779
There are open source implementations

>>55792094
Java runs the heavy lifting of some of the biggest websites in the world.

Yea, it's not perfectly efficient as compared to very well optimized machine code, but in almost any large program where Java runs more than, say, 5-10% slower overall, you only have yourself to blame.

It's fine. It's good for large groups and it's easy to find competent programmers that know java.

I don't really enjoy working in it, although java 8 has made it better.

Most of the people who complain about it on here have no actual experience shipping software.

This page pretty much sums it up.

http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/java

File: my-first-day-as-a-java-software-engineer-in-the-new-company_o_577126.jpg (56KB, 640x492px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 640x492px

>>55791753
it has many flaws. the design architecture of the jdk, it there is any, is pretty stupid. the objects sometimes require you to extend functions, dude I just want to tell the object to do what I want it to do, I dont care about object oriented bullshit or design patterns the jdk developers like. I dont wanna extend classes, I dont like inheritance in OOP, it's retarded. World was fine before inheritance existed. it's not like I dont understand the concept, but it triggers me when people misuse it and forces me to use it and clutter my code. java is also clusterfuck because it attracts asspies so you end up dealing with code written by asspies, your work becomes something other than solving an actual real world problem and you spend most of your time trying to understand how an object which is made by a complete moron works and what he has intended the object to do. you see comments like "oh this is my blabla worker object it doesnt get anything done prorperly but you can make it work if you extend some retarded class and assign this bullshit property to that it's dependency injection bro such buzzword much object oriented it's 2016" dude, dude. please kill yourself.

>>55792491
>i don't like inheritance
You have no understanding of oop and yet chose to talk shit about it. Just because you have worked with pajeets doesn't mean it's java's fault. I bet you are a recent college grad with little experience with oop.

>>55792539
Basically every respected computer scientist dislikes inheritance. Especially how it's implemented in Java.

>>55792491
> I dont like inheritance in OOP, it's retarded. World was fine before inheritance existed.
No, it wasn't. For most programming groups without an all-star team and generous time budget, this just meant spaghetti code that could only be maintained "efficiently" if by chance the respective authors remembered their shit well.

No, you're not going to get any normal team to write purely functional code or something close to it either, though arguably that'd be a viable alternative that actually would let you drop OOP it's just not going to happen.

>>55792539
If you're conflating a dislike of inheritance with a rejection of OOP itself you should probably bite your tongue when trying to talk about what other people don't understand.

>>55791753
>What does /g/ think of Java?
Excellent documentation
Excellent structure
Too time consuming compared to higher level things like Python or Matlab
Non-ugly

Love it after all. Just improve the try-catch disgusting syntax, it really makes the code almost unreadable.

>>55791753
Java – it happens.
If you're developing Android you don't really have a choice. There A LOT of enterprise systems that use Java, so no shortage of jobs.

Wouldn't be my first choice – but having gone through my early CS program being forced to write in C++, then having them let us use Java for the last few programs, it felt like magic. No pointers, garbage collection, did I mention no pointers?!!! Shit was beautiful.

>>55792491
>I just want to tell the object to do what I want it to do
Inheritance _is_ the method of telling objects what to do. You are a person who just wants to nail in nails without doing unrelated bullshit like holding a hammer.
Of course you're bad at programming with Java - you don't know how to use it.

>>55792563
And you chose to copy what they say. Is there a source?
>>55792571
It is one powerful tool of oop. One that can be musused but still very very useful.

>>55792594
>If you're developing Android you don't really have a choice.
Except... you know... for all those other languages out there that can target android. Even C#. C and C++ are even supported natively.

>>55792597
“Object-oriented programming is an exceptionally bad idea which could only have originated in California.” – Edsger Dijkstra

You can find quotes like this for basically every single respected computer scientist. OOP was designed by Pajeets for Pajeets.

>>55792632
I'd like one from Abelson please.

>>55791753
y'know, it works, but I don't like it. Hopefully going away.

>>55791753
I learnt C# first but I wanted cross-platform programs and Java was the solution. It was very easy to learn Java coming from C#.

>>55792632
Times change. Oop proved itself in practice and it works great. Give me a reasoning of Dijkstra.

>>55792643
"Object Oriented programming has done irreparable harm to a generation of programmers. Dijkstra was right." - Hal Abelson

>>55792718
The source please.

>>55792727
Do you not have access to Google?

>>55792766
I do. Google confirms this quote does not exist. If you want to demonstrate that it's an actual quote by Abelson and not something you made up, you have to post a proper source.

>>55792727
>>55792709
>>55792684
>>55792643
https://www.talisman.org/~erlkonig/misc/oopbad/

>>55792806
Where is the source for that quote anon.

>>55792788
Leave it to OOP advocates to not even know how to use Google.

>>55792838
Doesn't make your point any stronger.

>>55791753
Worse than Hitler.

>>55792823
I am not talking about quotes. Quotes are not science or arguments. Quotes dont prove anything, I am not the guy who talked about quotes. I am someone else

>>55792856
That is about disproving claims of superiority. But we here are just claiming fitness for purpose.

>>55792856
>https://www.talisman.org/~erlkonig/misc/oopbad/
>GUI interfaces
>OOP Programming

is this guy retarded or something

>>55792897
the short term memory of a human brain is limited and I don't think expecting a programmer to spend a lot of time memorizing names of objects and how they work increases productivity. It's not that I don't like objects, I don't like how it is misused and nobody dares to criticise the people who misuse it it's politically incorrect.

>>55792956
You have to memorize APIs in any case. If you want to claim that OO APIs are more difficult to memorize than functional APIs, you need something more substantial to back your claim than "it's my opinion".

>>55792597
>It is one powerful tool of oop
It's one tool of OOP, 1 that a lot of people dislike. Components is another equally powerful tool of OOP, and most OO devs I know would choose composition over inheritance, in fact it's become a meme. If you are still using inheritance more than 1 level deep, you are fucking shit up

>>55792806
You can make at least an equally long list for imperative / procedural languages, even more so if you mix in random problems from all kinds of language implementations and claim it's all a problem of "imperative" / "procedural" languages without OOP as a whole.

Well, even if you don't get parity in that sense it'll already be a very long list for basically any widespread language that is predominantly programmed in conventional imperative / procedural style on its own.

>>55793022
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_over_inheritance

That page is hilarious. Code for composition is twice as long and filled to brim with boilerplate. Way to demonstrate a point.

>>55792982
in.net you can do so much with just sqlcommand and generics, dont compare it to having a moron in your programming team which creates objects, getters and setters for everything. oop is to simplify complex problems. I can imagine so many scenarios oop can be useful. it's purpose is not to model everything. I like objects which represent an independent machine, for example, you may create an object which does everything you tell it to, processes anything you give it to, like a robot, that's very useful. they are useful when you wanna build a layer on top of your database. but again, I expect that object to work independently, takes input when I throw anything at it and does what I tell it to do with it, without needing to read much about it's infrastructure. if anyone is trying to model a data row with a structure like {username, password, usertype} as user being the base class and creating a new subtype for each user type all I want to do is to slam his head with his laptop and get the fuck out of my office.

>>55793022
> If you are still using inheritance more than 1 level deep, you are fucking shit up
Where do you get this nonsense from?

Almost everyone still uses inheritance more than 1 level deep.

You are most definitely not supposed to maximize the amount of composition. You most often just use that when you're not dealing with an actual subtype that you could substitute its supertype with, though there are a few other reasons too.

>>55793131
We're not even talking about misuse of OOP.

It's really nice to see OOP dying.

>>55793146
>Almost everyone still uses inheritance more than 1 level deep.
maybe in your college.
why do you think languages like php gained popularity? because people were sick of oop bullshit of java and .net

>>55793210
PHP gained popularity because it lets you make a web page without programming experience. Your argument is really weak if you have to cite PHP as something positive.

>>55793205
this

>>55793210
> why do you think languages like php gained popularity?
Because it was easier to make websites with them than with CGI and shit, or all the shitty client-side solutions like flash and Java applets.

But we're not really much at PHP anymore, we've quite strongly moved on to Javascript. Coupled with server-side languages -often actually Java- for all those instances where servers do significantly more than semi-dumbly serving files (files including aforementioned JS).

>>55793071
>wikipedia
lmao, still you missed the point of both concepts

>>55791779
Cannot wait for the day oracle dies in the ass. Seriously

>>55793313
>-often actually Java-
you fucking wish Pajeet

>>55793316
I don't remember making any points about any of those concepts so it's pretty unlikely that you know anything about my understanding of them.

>>55793205
>>55793261
it wont die, people will just learn when to use objects.
>>55793313
and javascript doesnt have a real oop mechanism, it's all workarounds. you know why, because the creators know when it's useful and when it's not.

>>55793336
Your english comprehension is bad, I never mentioned anything about your points, I mentioned you missing the point

>>55793342
>missed the point of both concepts

Please by all means do explain to me what you mean by this if not me not understanding inheritance and composition well.

>>55793205
Was it ever used more than it is today?

The majority of smartphone plebs use OOP Java apps on their smartphones that pull data from OOP server stacks running Java.

>>55793331
They do. Here's a really small sample:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_languages_used_in_most_popular_websites

But there are a lot more web servers that run a JVM.

>>55793357
That the only thing you bring up about composition is its verbosity in a relatively small example without experience in professional usage on a larger scale for both concepts. That's how you missed the point, through your observation rather than lack of your own points

Relevant question. I am building a web application in Java. I chose java because it's OOP, high level, many libraries, and runs well on Linux. However I also am well versed in C#/.NET. Now with all the recent talk about Mono and running C# on Linux, does anyone know how C# compares to Java on Linux servers for web application scenarios? Nothing crazy complex, general use case being several thousand concurrent users, RDBMS backend (Postgres if it matters), session handling, that's all I can think of for now. As a bonus I'd like to consider data mining as well. I am using a simple servlet container like Jetty/Tomcat since I use Spring and don't need Java EE in addition.

I know people say Java eats up RAM but I wonder if it makes up for this in terms of performance compared to C#, SPECIFICALLY on Linux servers. If it matters, on multi (4+) core servers. I can't find much information on this, hence why I'm asking.

>>55792632
From what I learned, OOP was invented by two Norwegians as in the form of the language Simula, but that the term OOP was invented by that smalltalk guy.

>>55793377
Oh, that's not my point. That's what the code on the page shows. I made the point about how Wikipedia's example is bad at demonstrating those perceived benefits of composition over inheritance - not about concepts themselves. Looks like you're the one having problems with comprehension after all, anon.

>>55793364
the reason why they use java is not reduced development cost. it's for platform independency so that they can mix any kind of cpu given at any time, they can choose any cpu architecture when it goes cheaper. also, dont assume any programming pattern just by looking at hte language. facebook used php for long.

>>55793364
You know you fucked up with a language when you trail behind Python with the bigger companies. I knew Google had a hard-on for python to list it first before java, lmao

>>55793395
You're the one with the poor comprehension considering I've already mentioned I was consdering your observation, not your points or lack of, in mind

>>55793412
It's a perfectly valid observation given examples in the wiki page.

>>55793420
I don't give a fuck what you think faggot

File: akka-logo-cloud.png (42KB, 940x200px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 940x200px

>>55793404
The reason why they use java is usually that it turned out to be the best language for them, often because of the frameworks, JVM, or the language itself.

Many companies rewrote existing software in multiple languages and still ended up with a lot of Java 'cause it worked best.

That won't apply to everyone, but it's just a fact that a lot of companies use a JVM to feed production websites or their internal business processes in a very significant way.

>>55793564
ok it's the best language then. go learn java.

>>55793595
> ok it's the best language then
It's primarily just not nearly as obsolete/bad -conceptually as OOP language or in actual business / private use- as anon suggested.

> go learn java
Is that your idea of an insult?

File: java.jpg (131KB, 739x710px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 739x710px

>>55791753

Oh well...

Java is the Lingua Franca of programming. Every programmer knows some Java, even if it's just a little bit.

Java is also a noob langauge, because it's pretty difficult to shoot yourself in the foot (unlike C or C++) and even if you fuck shit up, you get a nice stack trace with a description of the error. I'd like to call Java the "Lego language", because you can put things together and apart without further ado. But it's also a "powerless" langauge. You want something cool? You have to build it yourself.
People brag about the huge java libraries ecosystem and fail to see why you need such an huge ecosystem in the first place.


Because Java is the lego language, there are serveral implications:

1. You can build huge applications with it. And I mean really really huge.

2. You need a lot of "artificial" shit to keep things together, a lot of frameworks to manage your shit, a lot of design patterns and so on.. Many people think, design patterns are a sign of "mature programming" when in reality it's more about missing features of a langauge - "Design pattern" is really just another word for "Workaround".

3. Because it's a lego langauge you can easily take some components and outsource them, either in small scale (junior devs) or largescale (outsourcing jobs to India). Is this good or bad? Well, for the management it's good most of the time.

4. You easily find devellopers, you don't need specialists for every task. Just hire some code monkeys and pay them per LOC, in Java that really gets shit done.


If you have some time I'd like to recommend you this article. It's not short, but very interesting to read and will give you some intersting perspective on Java, Python and Lisp..

>http://www.paulgraham.com/icad.html

>>55794427

>I know BASIC
>By relation, I am a computer programmer.
>I know nothing about Java aside from it's a programming language.
>Hence by knowing BASIC and not knowing Java your premise is thus rendered moot.

>>55793387
Do not ever attempt C# on anything that's not Windows, it doesn't work.

Just stick with Java, or rather, I recommend Python.

>>55794553

When I said "Every programmer knows some Java" I used a trope:

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trope_(literature)


If you really want to split hairs (beware, this is also a methapor !) you could say:
"The vast amount of serious programmers knows at least some basics of Java, as it is also expected as industry custom & practice.."

File: image.jpg (86KB, 400x305px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 400x305px

>>55791834
>>55791779
Won't stop oracle for suing you for using their API

>>55792094

Learning C++ in 2016 just screams Pajeet. Java is shit, but when you shiteaters squabble over java and C++ it's about as pathetic as /v/ squabbling over which console is better.

File: 1664_1.jpg (155KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 600x800px

>>55791753
>javafx 8
>combobox resets its value when you change Editable prop
>fixed in 9 instead of being backported to 8
>9 is unreleased
I really love java. Like, seriously, usually I have problems with languages/frameworks because I am idiot, but with Java I mostly have problems because of bugs in JDK.

>>55795367

Java =/= JavaFX though.

Don't confuse Cancer with Aids...

>>55796438
It's standard GUI library now, not some separate package.
I still glad they are fixing it, it's just really annoying to not be able to get bugfixes as soon as possible.

>>55791753
It ain't good. We need to get rid of the applets.

>>55791753
Literally the messiest fucking thing ever devised by mankind

>C and C++ are old and nobody uses them
>Java is messy Pajeet lego language
>Python is retarded
>Javascript is for webplebs
>PHP is an abomination
>Ruby is for hipsters

Wtf do I learn then? What's a good all-rounder language?

>>55796659
>>Python is retarded
You are retarded. Proceed to basic and never come back.

>>55796659
Rust. You will be unemployed forever tho.

>>55791753
Never had any moment in my whole development career where I thought using Java would be a good choice.

>>55796659
>C and C++ old

Doesn't mean it's trash, it's extremely powerfull.
If you know how to program "good" in C or C++ you are basically a god.

>>55796659
Depends on what you'd like to do.

>small web development
Javascript

>desktop applications
C

>scripts and automators
Python

>>55796682
>not understanding I was just quoting /g/entooment with green arrows

>>55791753
What does Java think of Java

>>55796659
>Ruby is for hipsters
>PHP is an abomination


Although there are hyperboles, there are some truth in it.

>Wtf do I learn then?

Anything that your job requires.

>>55796659

Don't listen to /g/.

The langauges that /g/ approves are niche languages like Rust or Clojure..


Basically you need more than one langauge. Or to put it like this: The language you pick should be appropriate for the purpose.

>C and C++ are old and nobody uses them

C and C++ are (after Java) the languages with the most jobs. C is a simple and ugly language. C programms are usually very fast, so you want this for performance critical tasks (heavy computation, system processes and so on).

C++ is.. well it's like a religion, you either love it or hate it. It's a very very big langauge, you can do everything with it. But it's not easy and not necessarily a good langauge IMHO.

>Java is messy Pajeet lego language

It is. But if you know C or even some C++ you will find that Java is a lot easier than them.

>Python is retarded

Yes and no. It's for scripting (first and foremost). It's also great for scientific computations and GUIs. You can also do web stuff with it. Its also good for rapid proto typing and as "duct tape langauge" to get small tasks done fast.

>Javascript is for webplebs

There is no reason to use it if you're not into web development.

>PHP is an abomination

Yes, but some frameworks are OK.


>Ruby is for hipsters

Ruby (as a language) is pretty cool actually.

The problem is that Rails attracted a lot of noobs in the past (even though Rails is not that simple if you want to understand it completely).


OK, if you want something really nice..

Start learning Scheme (just work your way through "SICP") or Perl.

>>55794427
>Java is also a noob langauge, because it's pretty difficult to shoot yourself in the foot (unlike C or C++) and even if you fuck shit up, you get a nice stack trace with a description of the error.
Is that suppose to be a bad thing?

>>55797231
>C is a simple and ugly language.
>C is an ugly language.

Whoa, you should take that back buddy.

>>55797252

No.

I didn't write a rant, I tried to give an overview of the language.

>>55797265

Are you serisous?!?

I'd really like to know which langauge is more ugly than C (let's ignore COBOL for a moment).

I like Java and I like the extreme level of "beaurocracy" its OOP model enforces on you. I wouldn't pick it for a quick and dirty personal project, but for a large codebase developed by multiple people it's a fucking blessing and the primary reason for Java's popularity in enterprise.

File: hestio.jpg (54KB, 500x731px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 500x731px

>>55797330
Java is a fuckload uglier

>>55797013
>not understanding I am crazy funboy who got triggered every time someone says something bad about python

>>55798289
Python is nice desu

>>55797569
If I bite those bazoongas, will they explode?

>>55791753
Java is an inefficient, memory-intensive whore, but it really simplifies making cross-platform applications.

>>55793339
>and javascript doesnt have a real oop mechanism

Not true with ES6.

>>55791753
deprecated

>>55792094
retard

>>55798885
is-a relationship is non-existent in JS because it's meaningles in a non-strongly-typed language, you can pass any type to any method/function. class and extends keywords in ES6 are just synactic sugar over prototype-based inheritence.

it's shit