Java 1.5 vs C#

SexyFingers writes "Sun released Java 1.5. The non-API stuff that they've added made it finally "catch-up" with C# - since both languages are built to support OOP from the ground-up, their constructs become almost identical as additional OOP "features" are supported. So if you're doing C# and your foundations in OOP are rock-solid, there really isn't any difference whether you're coding C# or Java."

Here's the list of enhancements to the Java Language:

1. Generics (C# 2.0 already supports this)
2. Enhanced For-Loop (the foreach construct in C# 1.0, duh!)
3. Autoboxing/Unboxing (C# 1.0 already has this, everything is an object, even the primitives - not really, but they do it so well...)
4. Typesafe Enums (again C# 1.0 already implemented this, but I think they've added a little bit more twist in Java, that its actually a better implementation)
5. Varargs (C# 1.0's params construct, ellipsis construct in C++)
6. Static Import (I don't know if C# 1.0 has this, or C#2.0, but C# has a construct for aliasing your imports - which is way cooler. Static Import, actually promotes bad coding habits IMHO)
7. Metadata/Annotations (this is C# 1.0's Attributes, Sun's upturned noses just gave it a fancier name - also, C#'s implementation is better and more intuitive)

They've beefed up the API some, and integrated several packages with the regular JSDK that used to be a part of a separate package or installation ---in my NSHO, the Java API has become bloated...

At this point (even before Whidbey) the deciding factor (as always) for Enterprise work, when choosing a language platform, should be the support it has behind it, in terms of IDE, tools, api, and longevity of the vendor pushing it (forget the OpenSource crap argument, those guys are too in love with Perl, Python, and Ruby - Java could become the child nobody wants to talk about if Sun dies) - right now that's C# and the .NET Framework ---

If you ask Paul Graham though, both language would be utter crap and fit only for idiots :) http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html [I'm exaggerating, so hold off on those flames.]

Comments

I code C# for a living

[carpe_noctem]

...and let me tell you, java doesn't have to do that much to "catch up" to it.

Re:I code C# for a living

[Westley]

So if you find C# abstract, where *exactly* is Java better, as a language? Or were you actually comparing the libraries? (Which bit of C# itself took hours for you to figure out?)

Personally I find them reasonably equivalent, but C# has a few advantages (properties, delegates, events) and the .NET library has had fewer iterations so is less internally inconsistent than the Java libraries at the moment.

Re:I code C# for a living

[GCP]

And I was a member of one of the JCP expert groups that brought you Java 5.

java doesn't have to do that much to "catch up" to it.

Stated another way, Java 5 is still behind C#, to which I would agree.

As to how far behind, that depends on what you value. Java's event handling/callback design is atrocious compared to the convenience of delegates. I would much rather pass a single method called OnAccountOverdrawn()to the event notifier than the Java style of making the whole class an instance of some interface, implementing stubs for all the useless methods of the interface, then implementing the one useful method--which will have a useless name like DoAction() that you can't change, then passing the object that contains the DoAction() method to the event notifier.

And for many things such as generics, autoboxing, enums, etc. (I don't recall which ones specifically), there are actual semantic differences in the virtual machine for C#, whereas Java's knockoff versions are just syntactic sugar for the writing out the equivalent source code yourself. I AM in favor of syntactic sugar, but having the actual semantics available in the underlying runtime gives you additional advantages.

Java's great advantage is its ubiquity, which is also an impediment to improvement. Sun's position was that it was pretty much finished with language improvements after Java 1.1 and would thereafter concentrate on libraries that would run on existing JVMs. New JVMs might run the code even better, but the old JVMs would still run it.

Microsoft knew they had to do better, or nobody would switch. They did a lot of things better, and they seem committed to doing more, even if it means obsoleting their existing VMs. They have far more control over The (One) Platform and seem quite willing to make improvements to C# and the other .Net technologies that will require a VM upgrade.

One catgegory of improvement they seem interested in is a way to make dynamic languages, like Python or Lisp, work REALLY well. Another is support for functional languages like Haskell or OCaml that have special needs of their own.

And if they do it well, (my speculation now), they could even add some of the attractive features of those languages, languages I like more than C#, to C#, widening the gap with Java.

Java might have a very hard time keeping up with C# improvements while anchored to existing runtimes, and letting go of the anchor would seriously impact its ubiquity, which is one way in which Java is vastly better than C#.

I don't think it's a given that Java is going to catch up to C#. But if Mono and/or DotGnu don't succeed, it may not matter as Windows fades away (which I believe it will).

I'm confused

[abrotman]

Where's the story? Or is this just one person's interpretation of Java vs. C#?

flamebait

[Bert690]

It's times like this when you'd REALLY like the ability to mod the story itself as troll/flamebait!

At this point (even before Whidbey) the deciding factor (as always) for Enterprise work, when choosing a language platform, should be the support it has behind it, in terms of IDE, tools, api, and longevity of the vendor pushing it (forget the OpenSource crap argument, those guys are too in love with Perl, Python, and Ruby - Java could become the child nobody wants to talk about if Sun dies) - right now that's C# and the .NET Framework ---

Cue the zealots on both sides

[JUSTONEMORELATTE]

Why again can't I mod a story as -1 Flamebait?

--
I'll pay you $10. Really.

I want functions

[Tablizer]

I want actual functions, not "activity objects". Almost everyone, except for the extreme OO zealots, agree that OOP is not necessarily the best approach to every problem.

Too bad we can't mod articles

[MojoRilla]

This would get a -1 Flamebait.

My feeling is that these features are good news. There should be no gloating on the part of C#, it was clearly built on Java's coattails.

Competition is a great thing, ain't it?

Re:Too bad we can't mod articles

[Slime-dogg]

I wouldn't give Java the credit for C#. If anything, it was Delphi that C# was built upon. The only thing that C# "borrowed" from Java is the idea of a VM, and even that functions in a different way than the Java one.

Why is there a C# advertisement on /.?

[Cloudgatherer]

Seriously, this looks like an ad for C#, a bunch of claims with very little support/evidence for those claims.

I've worked on C# and Java projects. As far as I'm concerned, C# = MS Java. MS could not control Java, so they abandoned support for it and built thier own "version." It's really a rinse & repeat cycle for MS: see successful software, build own version of said software to try to take over that market as well.

I call bullshit

[The Bungi]

There is no apparent point to this "story". It's full of grammatical errors and obvious flamebait arguments (flamebait in the context of the slashbot groupthink). What, "C# is teh roxx0rz and Java.. well, I forgot teh point I was makeing for Java"? "The open source crap argument"? Way to go.

Here's my theory. Along with the ubiquitous slashvertisements and the Microsoft-bash-of-teh-day barrage posts, these are a perfect opportunity to create a story that will generate 1,000+ comments and ten times those many page views and ergo ad impressions.

C'mon, C# vs. Java? Outside of "RIAA sues 86 year-old grandma", "We hate Bush, let's talk" and "Microsoft patents KDE" there is no better source of inflammatory material in the dorkosphere.

Sad, really.

Mistake

[ajs]

I'm not pleased with the "catch-up" game that Java is playing here. Java was a fairly nice middle-ground betweeen high and low level programming, and what appears to be an effort to become a high level language is rather ominous for those who are interested in testability and performance in Java.

This, BTW, is why you don't want your language to be controled by a company which in turn has a marketing-driven bottom-line. The idea that two languages could co-exist with different target audiences is nonsense to marketing droids, but perfectly reasonable to someone like Guido van Rossum, Larry Wall or any of the other maintainers of truly open-source languages. Open source isn't the only way to maintain this focus, but in today's marketing-driven world, you aren't likely to see too many Bell Labs-like organizations putting out languages like C (which was semi-open source, as was Unix). Java and C# are probably much more typical.

Re:Mistake

[Sanity]

Java was a fairly nice middle-ground betweeen high and low level programming, and what appears to be an effort to become a high level language is rather ominous for those who are interested in testability and performance in Java.

Generics improve testability because they largely eliminate runtime ClassCastExceptions. I haven't seen any evidence to show that any of these features impose a performance penalty. Most just make the developers life easier by saving them from repeating common code patterns.

This, BTW, is why you don't want your language to be controled by a company which in turn has a marketing-driven bottom-line.

Yeah, because hardly any companies are driven by their bottom lines...

Re:APIs

[SnapShot]

I use DOM within XML as well as the MessageDigest using the MD5 algorithm every day. So I'm letting you know...

Or, is your complaint based on the fact that the libraries that underlie the XML and Security algorithm API's can be swapped out? To me, that's a feature not a bug but YMMV.

Re:Sounds a lot like religion

[jayminer]

I code C# for a living, so according to your definition, sold (or more appropriately rented) my soul to the devil. (This does not change the fact that I personally prefer free/open source technology. My PDA, my media players, my home operating system are all free/open source based.)

Java is not any more closer than C# to open source technologies. Sun doesn't like open source, just as Microsoft.

It's a very well known fact that Java has been a base (or in other words "the" figure) for Microsoft while developing C#, but that does not imply that "Java is good, C# is bad" or vice versa.

I would be happier personally to code in Java, but professional life yields to disqualify who resists new technology.
Your choice of programming language is not your religion, and it can change continuously through your life. Just like your operating system.

Important differences between Java and C#

[daveho]

While neither Java nor C# is truly free of being controlled by an Evil Corporation(tm), Java at least has multiple vendors, runs on a wide variety of platforms, and has an open standardization process.

With C#, stuck in windoze

[JPyObjC Dude]

so if you're doing C# and you're foundations in OOP is rock-solid, there really isn't any difference whether you're coding C# or Java.

He kind of forgot that there are many programmers and customers who DON'T want to deploy their systems on win32. With Java apps, you don't have to. In fact you can choose almost any operating system and hardware. Anybody who chooses C# over Java for enterprise deployments is truly a MicroWeenie.

I much prefer my 8 processor HP UX box any day :]

Re:With C#, stuck in windoze

[pesc]

You are right. One main feature that Sun designed for Java was WORA (Write Once Run Anywhere). M$ thought this sucked. They tried to destroy that feature and got sued over it. So the invented C# instead. C# isn't WORA, it is WORM (Write Once Run on Microsoft). With C#, you are locked in again. That's the whole point with C#.

Re:APIs

[AKAImBatman]

Let me know when stuff like an XML Parser and MD5 are native in Java.

They ARE.

XML package
MD5 and SHA support

The former has been in Java since 1.3, and the later since 1.1(!).

Honestly, Java has every feature and the kitchen sink in its core APIs. And if a feature isn't there, it's very easy to write a library to add it. That's why programmers like Java so much.

Any other features you'd like me to find for you?

"One Person"... "One C# Developer"

[Black-Man]

opinion. broken link... poor grammar... this guy is a joke. He pulls out 7 new features!! What about built-in queue support?

Only thing I agree with is generics has been long overdue.

Re:Flaws in both Languages

[scovetta]

You use PHP/Perl on a server? For something other than adding phpbb to your homemade website? Sorry, but PHP/Perl serves a purpose, and so do Java/C#, and they two are almost mutually exclusive.

For enterprise-grade web-applications (not hacks), it's .NET or Java. For real applications, it's either .NET, Java, or C++.

End of story. Don't argue with me, just accept it.

Re:Flaws in both Languages

[nat5an]

Who modded the parent up? The post is woefully inaccurate.

1. What exactly does it mean if a language is "open source?" Surely, the specification is available for free. If you wanted to, you could write a lexer/parser/compiler without paying anything to Microsoft/Sun. Do you mean that the tools provided by the companies aren't open-source?

2. C# doesn't "require" a virtual machine any more than Java "requires" a virtual machine. One could write a native compiler for both. Additionally, in fact, Microsoft's .NET implementation does just-in-time compilation of the .NET assembly generated by the C# compiler (the bytecodes, basically), so it doesn't actually run inside of a virtual machine, nor is it interpreted. Since Sun's javac is supposed to generate portable bytecodes to run on different architectures, they decided to use a VM to avoid having to write a thousand different JIT compilers.

Neither of these are inherent weaknesses in the specifications of the languages, they're implemetation details. Since this story is supposed to be about new language features in Java, I don't see how bitching about Microsoft/Sun's implementations is really relavent.

Re:Java 1.5 vs c# 2.0?

[Anonymous Coward]

Comparing an unreleased version of C# to the available version of Java is just stupid. Further, with no mention of the provided API any discussion is a waste of time. While JAVA offers a bloated API, it is extensible and great for programming, unlike dot NET 1.1 which seems to be an attempt to build OO on top of a procedural framework that doesn't provide the programmer with the same level of flexability. The other thing to consider is that dot NET means normally a purchase of Visual Studio, while JAVA normally means a free download of the JSDK and JCreator. Also IMHO Java doc is much better then the stuff that comes with dot NET. The rest is rant......

Comparing a released software product that is available almost for free to an unreleased product that costs hundreds of dollars is just dumb. Where is the story here?

Ravioli Code

[Ian Bicking]

I think the problem you are seeing is Ravioli Code; a (perhaps excessive) reaction to spaghetti code. Also Java (and probably C#) programmers seem to take Patterns too seriously as well, patterns should be descriptive, not prescriptive.

Re:Ravioli Code

[metamatic]

Similarly, object orientation should be used as a tool, not enforced as a religion. If an object-oriented API to some functionality is the cleanest and most useful, implement that way; otherwise, don't. If the best way to build something is using functional programming, do that; don't try and force the code into an object-oriented paradigm.

Re:Meanwhile, C++ goes nowhere

[cpghost]

C++ is a great language, but it's choosy about its friends. It takes some time to master all (well most) advanced aspects, but as soon as you do, nothing beats a good C++/STL combo.

What I don't like about C++ standard, is the lack of a decent socket library that would be part of the i/o streams. There are non-portable classes for this of course, and everyone could roll their own, but it's not in the C++ standard (yet).

IMHO, one of Java/C# biggest advantages over C++ is this particular aspect. Not that it would convince me though to switch away from C++ to Java, which simply doesn't cut it yet.

For fast prototyping, I'd stick to Python, but when performance really matters, C++ is still king!

Welcome stranger!

[Oestergaard]

Welcome to planet earth - we also have a language called 'C++', but it is rather different from what you describe.

Here, we have compilers that can do bounds checking - avoiding buffer overflows, if you decide to use them.

However, the template feature of our C++ is so powerful, that when used together with structs and classes, one can produce beautiful code that is extremely powerful, yet so simple that it is easy to ensure it is not susceptible to said buffer overflows (or memory leaks or the thousand other plagues of much of the software that surrounds us).

This is why there is actually not anything fundamentally wrong with our C++. We are some who want template namespaces though, but outside of little issues (that do have workarounds) like that, the only things we really want is additions to the (already powerful) standard library, the STL.

One problem remains with our C++ though. We live on a planet inhabited mainly by clueless morons, people who do not like to learn, people who refuse to accept that maybe others have seen farther than themselves. This is why we, too, have a lot of problems with software in general - buffer overflows as you mention, among many other problems.

I am sure we can arrange for you to get a copy of our C++ standard - that will allow a clever individual, such as yourself, to write software without the problems we discussed. I would then suggest that we join our efforts, in teaching the unwashed masses how to actually use the language properly, so that we will not have to re-do all software in the world (both ours and yours) by ourselves.

Deal?

Re:Meanwhile, C++ goes nowhere

[deadlinegrunt]

Wow. I am amazed at your opinion and wish to understand it but I have to admit I reserved to just think that you do not know what you are talking about.

[snip]
"This problem is the primary reason that C# exists. If the C++ committee had fixed their language, we wouldn't need C#."
[snip]

First, this is not why C# exists. For real reason as to why it is search the net. Enough info out there without me reiterating it.

Second, there is "nothing really wrong with C++" and the reason the committee buys that is because it is true. The language specification spells out, as a single example, that if you index beyond the end of an array or dereference a null pointer BOOM! Undefined behavior, as in may work with some sort of reasonable expectation or may unleash flying monkey demons from your spouses nose with the sole purpose of ruining your computer career.

Third, C++ is not an OOPL like Java or C#. It is a multi-paradigm langauge with support for any type of construct you want to throw at it - including shitty code regardless of paradigm.

Again, I am trying to understand where you are coming from but I just do not see your point - or more directly that your point is valid.

C++ as a language is not really lacking at this ponit. Now standardized libs, like the inclusion of the STL was to the standard, are welcome. Things like concurrency, threading, gc, GUI, etc. Yes there are plenty out there but none of them "officially" standard yet. I think this argument would support your point better, if I was understanding what you meant rather than what you typed.

Re:Java 1.5 vs c# 2.0?

[swilver]

C's implementation of abstracting machine code is just a compiler hack, the underlying machine code has not changed. The only benefits are some compiler errors and warnings and not performance and storage efficiency that real machine code can offer.

Seriously, I couldn't care less about better performance. I care about being able to avoid probably 75% of all casting that goes on in our 10.000+ source file project and being able to specify our API even tighter and catch more problems before it hits our customers.

I just wish Sun had done this 3 years ago, but better late than never.

Re:Flaws in both Languages

[scovetta]

As soon as people mention "enterprise-grade web applications" it's time to skip to the next thread. These people live in a little world that's been built for them by small minded project managers, clueless clients, and a university programming course that's been bought and paid for by a large corporation (usually Sun Microsystems).

I take exception to that. Just because you can't do it doesn't mean that it can't be done. Maybe where you're from, Sun runs things, but here, it's the business-- how can you get the job done better and faster? And Java has proven to be a useful tool, when used by competant programmers (not Learn Java in 21 Days type).

I'll try to make my case for "enterprise-grade web applications". Such an application needs the following features:

1. Does what the customers want
2. Secure
3. Database-driven
4. Clustered/clusterable
5. ***Maintainable***
6. Performs well
7. Integrates with other systems
8. Deliverable by the deadline

It's #5 and #8 that are hard to come by. As for maintainability, I see Perl as a Write-Once language, with PHP only slightly better. Java/C# are much easier to maintain because (a) their syntax is not prone to being overly compact (read: unreadble), and (b) the number of people who can maintain Java applications is probably much larger than those who can modify your Perl app.

You advocate Java and slam PHP in the same post? Both of these languages belong in the same beginners class.

Where do you work that Java is considered "beginner"? Have your company actually produced applications?

Re:You're going to name it what?!

[p2sam]

I would had prefer Java 2000 over Java 2. The first one is clearly meant to be used for marketing purposes ( I think you Sun guys call it branding ). The later is ambiguous. I can't tell if it's a marketing name or an engineering version name.

Any place for both of them ?

[dweeves]

It's too easy to give C# an advantage about what it adds to Java and forgetting it's a 95% Java clone.

Don't forget It took 7 years of Java and a Borland expert to produce C# !

During this time, Java did conquer most of the enterprise application development market and defined a technology model based on application servers handling component lifecycles.

C# as a language,has taken most of java state of the art paradigms and added some new features which are neat but, despite its huge base library is far from Java versatility and degree of maturity.

Java 1.5 advantages

• Language Features/Libraries:

• Server side Programming:
• Defined server side technology paradigms, with lots of implementors to handle them (open source and free ones are competing with the best commercial ones).

• Client Side Programming:
• Applets (which aren't dead technology if you know how to use them)
• Web Start

• IDE/Tools
• Eclipse (which is free and open)

• Management aspects
• Lots of available skilled developers
• Can run on any platform with a compliant JVM (if well coded)
• All big database vendors have JDBC drivers
• Mature technology

Java 1.5 Drawbacks

• Server Side:
• Web Service support are expensive to implement and non-standardized.
• Very poor JSF controls

• Client Side:
• Swing (but SWT / Eclipse rocks)

C# advantages

• Language Features:
• Benefits from the .Net Jitter.
• Events/Delegates model

• Client Side:
• Future Windows Development preferred language (along with XAML which is more about powerful UI macro-scripting)
• DirectX integration
• Speed (on Windows)

• Server Side
• ASP.Net Controls model

• IDE/Tools
• VS .Net (most productivity boosting IDE IMHO)

• Management aspects
• Still time to have plenty of Microsoft support if you have a interesting project.

C# drawbacks

• Language Features
• No Observable/Observer (but achievable through Events/Delegates)
• Serialization limitations

• Client Side
• No Windows independent GUI framework. (WebForms are server-based controls)
• No applets equivalent (don't event think about ActiveX)

• Server Side
• No detailed Infrastructural model, No best practices, No fine grained control.

• IDE/Tools
• No free IDEs compares to VS .Net and is really useable when you're used to commercial IDEs features. (Borland C# Builder CE is too restricted and not open source)

• Management aspects
• Young technology
• Not that much real experts available out of Microsoft
• Windows deployment only (Mono's out, but still work in progress ,can't be a professional choosen .NET deployment platform yet IMHO)

So, my conclusion is that by now, both technologies are interesting but Java is the most versatile.

I would prefer C# for:Windows Programming ,Attractive Web based interfaces (if an acceptable target platform is Mono or Windows), Porting existing windows applications to Web, Simple Self-Contained Web Services

I Would prefer Java for developing:Enterprise Applications,Complex Web Services,Highly interactive web interfaces (through applets),Multi OS client application.

For me, both languages are relevant, it's only a matter of what work has to be done and what resources are available to make it.Most of the time, technology is chosen based on a company resources capabilities!