Google Donates Windowbuilder, Codepro To Eclipse

h00manist writes "Google is donating Windowbuilder Pro and Codepro Profiler to the Eclipse project. 'Google acquired the software when it bought Instantiations, relaunching the Java graphical user interface building tool Windowbuilder Pro shortly after. Now the outfit has decided to donate both Windowbuilder Pro and the code analysis tool Codepro to the open source Eclipse project. Although Google has announced its intention to donate the software, it needs go through a rigorous filtering process to ensure that no intellectual property rights will be breached. Once those formalities are dealt with, it is likely that both Windowbuilder Pro and Codepro will tip up in the Indigo release of Eclipse sometime in June 2011.'"

Comments

Does anybody still use Java?

[flyingfsck]

Isn't Java getting on in years and in need of being replaced by something more modern?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't Java getting on in years and in need of being replaced by something more modern?

no.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[xnpu]

I don't like Java much myself, but I don't see it going anywhere. A staggering amount of java based (Android?) devices are shipped daily. Once the iPad version is released you may even see some folks switching (back) to it.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Hikaru79]

No. About 18% of all code written in 2010 was in Java. That's a huge percentage -- C had only 16%, and JavaScript (supposedly the hot new thing) is at 1.5%.

Believe it or not, Ruby hipsters on Reddit turn out not to be representative of the whole world.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Hikaru79]

Out of curiosity, the iPad version of what?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Nursie]

Yes, something modern like C or C++

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean like SL to lock the world tighter to Microsoft?
Personally, I prefer no monopoly lock software.
Everything is evolving on living markets, so is Java.
It is monopoly which stops all evolution and puts whole IT-world vulnerable to a single virus. Open, cross platform, no-vendor-lock-in solutions are the only way out of monopoly and to living markets.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[beh]

Strictly speaking, it doesn't need replacement...

But - ORCL is hard at work at trying to alienate people away from java... ;-)

What do you think makes google want to donate the code to the public? Is it the insight that the market might be dying if Oracle doesn't finally get a clue...?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[FuckingNickName]

Java has always essentially been Visual BASIC with a less annoying syntax. It's usually been suitable where Visual BASIC is suitable. Windowbuilder is just a friendly reminder of this.

Meanwhile, people doing real low-level or time-critical work use assembler/C/C++, and people doing real high-level work don't go for a primitive imperative language which looks like C/C++ with training wheels.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing that makes that a possibility at the moment is Oracle.
Otherwise compare it to C/C++.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mind adding some references?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

I presume he means the JRE. Which is a terrifying thought. Android's biggest fault is in bringing Java back to the consumer limelight. It should have stayed in the server world, where it actually belongs.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[deoxyribonucleose]

Meanwhile, people doing real low-level or time-critical work use assembler/C/C++, and people doing real high-level work don't go for a primitive imperative language which looks like C/C++ with training wheels.

Riiiiight. I wonder, where do people go who want to be able to find people to maintain their software for, say, a decade? Except for COBOL, of course... and that's going to get seriously expensive. (God, I really wish I was kidding about COBOL.)

Wake me up when one of the 'real high level' languages (whichever is your personal poison) has found a significant market and mind share. Meanwhile, I'll stick with whatever language fits the problem, instead of fitting the problem to my favourite language.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[cgomezr]

I suppose he is quoting the tiobe index because the numbers match: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html - however, taking this as an estimate of the amount of code that has been written in a given language is a wild guess at best.

If I had to take my own wild guess off the top of my head, I think I'd give Java more than 18% of the code written in 2010, though. C and C++ added together get quite more popularity than Java, but I don't think their usage in the enterprise is comparable to that of Java.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[prionic6]

That's because Java is so much more verbose ;)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Seth Kriticos]

Seems he was referring to the Tiobe community index at: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

Yes, it's controversial and probably a bit off the real numbers, but real numbers are near impossible to get. How do you want to know what people use in their closed projects? Nobody ever publishes that data.

Now if you check out a different chart, the language distribution of Github projects, you'd get a totally different picture: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html , but it's also not very representative for the entire ecosystem.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Disregarding the bullshit figures you cite, the fact that it has C/PHP/VB/Obj-C/Perl/Delphi in high positions is evidence of only one thing: that the merits of a programming language in no way determines its popularity. Proclaiming that your language is widely used is much like proudly stating your passion for mainstream radio pop-music. Its utterance achieves nothing, and only makes people look at you as if you are a fool.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[PCM2]

Riiiiight. I wonder, where do people go who want to be able to find people to maintain their software for, say, a decade? Except for COBOL, of course...

Errrr... Java debuted in 1995, and 2000 saw J2SE 1.3... it's almost 2011 now, does that count as a decade?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Splab]

Java is quite stable and quite fast. It has extensive documentation, some really really nice libraries to work with. This can be said about a lot of languages, but Java also has a very low learning curve, it's very fast to get started with on big projects and it just works [tm].

I used to hate Java, it was a buggy pile of poo, but the last couple of years I've been working quite a lot with Java and must say I'm truly impressed with what you can do today. Yes, you can get significant speedups using C/C++, however, I can build a safe multithreaded application way faster in Java than C/C++, thus making it a favorite for my set of problems (which happens to consist mostly of embarrassingly parallel problems).

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

the fact that it has C/PHP/VB/Obj-C/Perl/Delphi in high positions is evidence of only one thing: that the merits of a programming language in no way determines its popularity.

What the fuck are you talking about - that's exactly what it says! Visual Basic and Delphi are good for RAD GUI apps on Win32, ObjC via cocoa for the same thing on OSX. PHP is good for hacking together a quick website, Perl for general use scripting and C for talking to hardware.

proudly stating your passion for mainstream radio pop-music. Its utterance achieves nothing, and only makes people look at you as if you are a fool.

Programming languages have utility, the entirely subjective view would be "I prefer Ruby syntax". I think the OP touched a raw nerve with his (IMHO accurate) "Ruby hipster" remark, hence your childish, vitirolic analogy.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[deoxyribonucleose]

Errrr... Java debuted in 1995, and 2000 saw J2SE 1.3... it's almost 2011 now, does that count as a decade?

It most certainly does. C/C++, Java and C# are going to be around for quite a while yet: the odds are favourable for any language that has survived for long enough, and in which a sufficient number of people are capable if not proficient, whatever the technical merits of the languages in question (which shouldn't be scorned).

I was attempting being facetious about FuckingNickName's (what an elegant nick!) assertion that newer (or, in his/her/its terms, 'more high level') languages are always the better option. In engineering, you always have to deal with tradeoffs. Language elegance or expressiveness is far from the only factor to consider.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Compaqt]

>Isn't Java getting on in years and in need of being replaced by something more modern?

Yeah, just like C and C++ are about to be replaced (not).

Oh, and it's the top language on Sourceforge with 45k projects (C++ has 35k, and PHP 29k).

So, yeah, someone's using it. In addition to the community, 90% of Fortune 500 companies use it (that seems low to me). Also see here and here.

This is not to say Sun didn't mess up their chance to be even more dominant. Execs generally tend to want to use in the enterprise what they're using personally. Hence Windows Servers, and the current push to use consumer iPhones for corporations. Sun flubbed consumer Java.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[LizardKing]

Isn't Java getting on in years and in need of being replaced by something more modern?

So says you. I'd guess that you don't actually work as a programmer.

Speaking as someone who started his programming career using a mix of C and Perl, Java is a pretty good balance between a systems programming and scripting language. With the increased speed of both hardware and the JVM since Java first arrived, it's got to the point where I can rarely justify using a language like C or C++ on the grounds of performance. As for paradigms, Java's implementation of OO is so much better than C++ (methods always virtual for example) - it's just a shame that Java's generics were bolted on later in a less than ideal way. In the real world don't really see functional programming taking off, but even if it does, Scala may offer the best of both worlds.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[tcr]

... I think he means Android tablets.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Compaqt]

Did you mistakenly use the same href for your 2nd link? I didn't see anything about Github there.

Re: Tiobe stats- Basically, if you're creating a project, you'll likely use Java, C/C++, or PHP.

Btw, how annoying is it when you have to have Javascript to show a simple HTML page (tiobe.com)? Maybe Python or .NET (C#/VB.NET). Anything else is probably legacy/special requirements (COBOL) or trying to be a hipster (Ruby).

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[FuckingNickName]

assertion that newer (or, in his/her/its terms, 'more high level')

You are dense. LISP, Mathematica and Prolog are examples of "more high level" languages than Java. They all allow you to think about the problem rather than how the computer needs to process data because none of them are paradigmatically borne of Bjarne Stroustrup raping Alan Kay. They're all older than Java too.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Name something.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Java is fine. It works. It is solid.

All it needs is some "modernizing" to tidy it up and bring it over to newer operating systems.
Possibly even some better window management and design. (which i hope Windowbuilder could help with since it will be open sourced in this effort)
Only bad part about modernizing stuff is it tends to break backwards compatibility. (especially when you mess with the windowing stuff)
But with open source effort, people could make sure the new windowing system makes it to all previous systems as well. While a lot of people think of Windowing Systems from OSes to be pretty static, most of them are pretty damn flexible from what i have seen. (even older Windows versions)
Still, i prefer the nice, simple look of the average Java windows. Reminds me of older times when OSes just had nice, simple windows, none of this shiny nonsense or stupidly high resource usage just for the sake of high resource usage "since it is there". (I would rather not use my GPU unless needed, thank you! Still have power to pay for now!)

Java had the motto of "write once, run anywhere". While that doesn't contain a time reference, personally i would like to think of it as that as well. Java has been one of the few platforms to survive the test of time, despite very low users on the PC side.
And those users were for very simple reasons, Java was ahead of its time.
But now resources are plentiful and it runs fine, even on your lower hardware like Netbooks, something like Minecraft can run with reasonable speeds. (on lower settings at that, still though, only occasional jittering when game loads new chunks)

As for Java itself, in the hands of Oracle? Yeah, that is a headsore. Luckily, Java was open-sourced. Fork it.
Anyone know if there are any efforts to actually improve on Java right now? Or even fork it?
I think i saw some effort to add a bunch of new libraries to it recently, but there was a bit of backlash towards it, not sure of the name though. (although i COULD be thinking of JavaSCRIPT, too much juggling between them they sometimes mash together in my head)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[PCM2]

Yeah, but like the man said, that's far from the only factor to consider when choosing a language. Pretty much any CS grad from a reputable school will tell you that LISP (or Scheme, or another variant) is a superior language to anything else on the market. That said, name me ten major commercial software products that are written in LISP. Scratch that, name me one. It must be because the entire software industry as it has existed since the 1970s is stupider than last year's crop of CS graduates, huh?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[QuantumG]

Especially when people write Generic Strategy Factory pattern to create a single object.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[FuckingNickName]

It must be because the entire software industry as it has existed since the 1970s is stupider than last year's crop of CS graduates, huh?

LISP is not suitable for building a traditional OS. (Its descendants may be suitable for a LISP Machine / emacs / other managed style OS, but we're not using them.)

LISP is not suitable for straight high performance numerical computation: FORTRAN and then C/C++ have done well there in the general case, but you might want specialised numerical packages.

LISP is not always the best choice for modelling: Mathematica is good for what I do, IME.

But, yes, much of the rest of the software industry of the last couple of decades is comprised of idiots producing bloated crap, not having got much further conceptually than "I NEED THE COMPUTER TO DO THIS TEN TIMES SO I WRITE A FOR I=1 TO 10 LOOP". Whence Java. Do you disagree?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[xtracto]

(sorry, I'm a bit drunk) Hahahahhahah

Meanwhile, people doing real low-level or time-critical work use assembler/C/C++, and people doing real high-level work don't go for a primitive imperative language which looks like C/C++ with training wheels.

Meanwhile, people working "in the real world" embedded devices (from Refrigerators to DVD/BluRay players to Mobile phones) work in Java.

The majority of people working in assembler and low-level languages are usually doing some *very* specific development (i.e., they are a minority) or they are doing SDKs for people to use their hardware (so that third parties can program in Java).

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

'High level' does not mean a language is 'new.' (Technically, C is a high level language.) Higher-level languages predate most others. Semi-random example: ML and derivatives (SML, Haskell, OCaml, et cetera).

And C++ is probably one of the highest level languages you have ever seen. Java, by comparison, doesn't even come close to it. But typically, only expert library authors are wielding C++'s full potential. In common use, C++ is used as a less descriptive Java.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[syousef]

No. About 18% of all code written in 2010 was in Java. That's a huge percentage -- C had only 16%, and JavaScript (supposedly the hot new thing) is at 1.5%.

OH please! How can that be anything other than a shoddy estimate? How do you go about counting ALL the code writting in 2010?? Let alone breaking it down by language. What's your source? Are we talking estimated lines of code? Are we talking about job ads? You might as well pull those percentages out of your backside if you don't quote your sources.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[EsbenMoseHansen]

Ah. I did wonder why all Blueray players are so freaking slow and uncomfortable to use. Thanks for clearing that up!

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then it's no small wonder that those players implementing the full BD spec are unstable garbage; and likewise for all the Java-based phones (including Android, though to a lesser extent since only the apps are written -- partially! -- in Java).

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[EsbenMoseHansen]

Indeed. All Java needs is a way to handle general resources (e.g. file handles) in a sane way, ditch the sillier C syntax relics (e.g. case fall-through), ditch some of the sillier introduced syntax wrinkles (like package private default), get support for function(al)s, typing, inheritance, static polymorphism and then we are getting there except for the stuff I forgot ;)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Interestingly, if you look at http://www.ohloh.net/languages then it seems like Java is only ahead in number of projects, but behind in lines of code even when splitting C and C++.
I suspect a lot of Java OpenSource code to be tiny stuff like wrappers around a C/C++ library etc.
That said, I also suspect Java to be under-represented when you only look at OpenSource.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Two things.

Java is about as far from a systems programming language as you can get. It isn't even a very good applications language.

And You shouldn't be comparing Java to C++. C++ allows you to do OO with the performance of C. And there is a definite price you have to pay for that. If you're going to compare Java to anything it would be C#. Which is a better language all around.

Really no offense but people use Java now days for exactly the same reason they use COBOL.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[GreatBunzinni]

I have modpoints but as no one bothered to reply to this post and point it's naive, fanboy inconsistencies then I felt the need to do that myself.

First, you've claimed the following:

With the increased speed of both hardware and the JVM since Java first arrived, it's got to the point where I can rarely justify using a language like C or C++ on the grounds of performance.

If by "performance" you mean noticeable lag on your regular GUI operations then your comment is reasonable. The advances in the hardware world brought us in the last decade hardware powerful enough to run a GUI written even in the most bloated interpreted language you can find in a smooth enough way to not notice any lag any more. Yet, java still lags far behind languages such as C and C++ in performance, with some data crunching benchmarks running java at least twice as slow as the C++ program compiled with G++ and and also with the C program compiled with GCC. So, in the end what you said amounts to nothing more than claiming that writing programs in C or C++ instead of Java is rarely justifiable on the grounds of performance if and only if performance is irrelevant for the application you are developing.

Then you moved on to the OO paradigm, where you made another silly claim. You stated that

Java's implementation of OO is so much better than C++ (methods always virtual for example)

This statement is absurd. Do you happen to know what any C++ programmer must do in order to get all the methods in a class to be virtual? Well, he only needs to state that they are virtual. That is it. There is absolutely nothing in C++ that forces any class method to not be virtual. As a side note, not having a method to be virtual by default is a terribly useful feature, particularly in performance terms, as a method can be called without having to waste cycles checking up with a vtable to realize what method to call.

And just to drive the point home, which is that your comment regarding the implementation of the OO paradigm in Java Vs C++ doesn't make sense, let me just mention a single issue plaguing Java that C++ implements just fine: multiple inheritance. That, alone, is a big thorn in the side of the "Java's OO implementation is much better than C++", simply because it makes it just plain wrong.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Seth Kriticos]

ups, yes I did, my mistake, the correct link is: http://www.r-chart.com/2010/08/github-stats-on-programming-languages.html

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know who's right or wrong (or to what degree) but I'd like to hear reasons when I see this kind of claims of falsehood.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Exitar]

Well, it only shows that Ruby developers use GitHub.
Any data about SourceForge, Google Code or other similar sites?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[west]

mention a single issue plaguing Java that C++ implements just fine: multiple inheritance

I had a good chuckle at that statement because in my experience, the *lack* of MI and operator overloading features is one of Java's biggest selling features. (I've worked at companies that had to make it a firing offense to use either in order to stop programmers from using these features.)

Both these features allow programmers to write elegant, stream-lined code... for themselves. Unfortunately, the guy maintaining the code who has neither the experience with the project nor the mental acuity of the original programmer to see the mental model that underlied the programmer's conception of the code then destroys everything.

In their defense, MI and operator overloading have probably protected many a programmer's job. "We can't lay off Jeff, he's the only one who will ever understand the code he wrote."

(Caveat: Of course it's *possible* to write maintainable code using these features, but it's like setting the speed limit to 120 mph - a lot more people *think* they can manage it than can actually manage it, and there's a lot of collateral damage along the way.)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Honest question. Is multiple inheritance really that relevant though? Having heard how extremely careful one must be when implementing such feature and that it's possible to work around it? C# designers left multiple inheritance out too.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Stevecrox]

This is a very good point. In Java there are numerous safe guards you can add things like concurrent maps, synchronised statements, etc.. which when combined with good multi-threaded design make multi-threaded applications very easy to control and maintain.

Personally I also find it much easier to write modular code in Java. The Plug-in architecture coupled with the removal of header files prevents you from having stealth dependencies.

These things can be done in C and C++ but it is far harder to achieve and more importantly maintain.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[FuckingNickName]

Right, two things:

(1) Embedded != low level, so your whole post is a straw man;

(2) Most embedded devices unnecessarily working on top of a bloated JVM are shit anyway (see AC's post for Android case).

Your sig is quite correct, though :-).

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[m50d]

Java has its advantages as a slightly better C++ with a lot of enterprise infrastructure around it. But so much stuff is just painfully almost right with it (the generics as you mentioned, the separation of primitive types and objects, the handling of null, the way it still doesn't have closures...), I find myself hoping C# pushes it aside soon.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[goofy183]

Wrapping C/C++ in Java is doable but a pain. I'd argue that Java has such a large set of available libraries and built in APIs that you can generally do a lot more with a lot less code than in other languages.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's called C#.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[DrXym]

no

Java the language is usable but its certainly not as terse as it could be. The amount of boiler plate for getters / setters being a typical example, but also things like the lack of closures and the bloat when using anonymous inner classes. The platform is also at serious risk of fragmentation because of the perception that Oracle is not doing enough to push things forward in a timely fashion. Look at the glacial pace of development for Java 7.

If Oracle aren't careful then Groovy or some other JVM language will be perceived as Java++ and the original language will get left in the dust. I wouldn't be surprised with Apache's recent falling out with the JCP that things pick up pace in that department.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[he-sk]

Emacs.

It's not commercial, but it's arguably *very* popular.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Java is quite stable and quite fast

And that's why the JVM is written in Java instead of C/C++ and assembly, right? Hahahahahaha. The only time Java is "quite fast" is when you throw 40% more horsepower to run the apps than something written in C or C++.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[GreatBunzinni]

I don't see multiple inheritance as a vital feature. As you've stated, it is possible to work around it without much hassle. So, it may be very useful and convenient but it is not a vital feature.

That being said, the reason I made a point of mentioning multiple inheritance was to point out how absurd LizardKing's comment was. You simply cannot claim that a particular implementation is "so much better" than another when the allegedly better implementation at best implements some fundamental features in a half-assed way and at worse simply fails to implement them. As this is a (somewhat) technical forum, people must limit themselves to the facts regarding the technology and avoid unleashing the fanboy in them to boast about their pet tech through absurd and patently false statements such as the ones which I've pointed out. It diminishes the technology and it denigrates the people who are seriously invested in it.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[olau]

Inheritance in general is not that relevant. People overuse it and ruin their designs that way. With some exceptions, most things should be modelled with composition instead.

However, just like inheritance is sometimes actually useful, so is multiple inheritance.

Unfortunately, they don't tell you this in college. It takes a couple of far too deep inheritance designs to realize that maybe what they told you about inheritance being the corner stone was a lie.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[dargaud]

Meanwhile, people working "in the real world" embedded devices (from Refrigerators to DVD/BluRay players to Mobile phones) work in Java.

Maybe I should be ashamed, but I work with embedded devices (in C) and I have no idea how I could do the same work with Java. How do you even get a JVM to understand the specifics of the hardware ?!? Unless you meant Android which is a world in itself and where all the low level stuff is Linux anyway (in C).

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

(Caveat: Of course it's *possible* to write maintainable code using these features, but it's like setting the speed limit to 120 mph - a lot more people *think* they can manage it than can actually manage it, and there's a lot of collateral damage along the way.)

Terrible analogy. Speed limits - in most of the western world - are set by observing traffic when no limits are posted and going with the 85th percentile of what drivers naturally arrive at. Its only in cases of non-obvious road hazards (e.g. abrupt unexpected turns) and politics (national speed limits, rich neighborhoods, etc) that the posted limit is not based on drivers' own estimation of what they can manage.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Java has always essentially been Visual BASIC with a less annoying syntax. It's usually been suitable where Visual BASIC is suitable. Windowbuilder is just a friendly reminder of this.

Meanwhile, people doing real low-level or time-critical work use assembler/C/C++, and people doing real high-level work don't go for a primitive imperative language which looks like C/C++ with training wheels.

Your ignorance is amusing. How does it feel being a language fanboy? I bet you have an Xbox, right?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[PCM2]

Perhaps, but you do need a C compiler to build Emacs (and the earliest versions did not embed a LISP interpreter at all). Emacs is arguably not an editor written in LISP, but an editor written for programmers who like LISP.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[PCM2]

But, yes, much of the rest of the software industry of the last couple of decades is comprised of idiots producing bloated crap, not having got much further conceptually than "I NEED THE COMPUTER TO DO THIS TEN TIMES SO I WRITE A FOR I=1 TO 10 LOOP". Whence Java. Do you disagree?

I think thousands of 22-year-old CS grads with a firm command of the Jedi-like powers of LISP could rebuild the entire computer industry in their image, cast aside the programming bad habits of the past and lead us forward, Tron-like, in a new Golden Age of software purity ... if it were even remotely practical to do so. And there's the rub.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[FuckingNickName]

Yes, the lack of people willing (able?) to think is always a problem.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[codepunk]

As a system administrator I love the hell out of java. It takes a metric shit ton of hardware to run the most basic app at acceptable speeds. If it where not for java I would likely be out of a job.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[SanityInAnarchy]

Java multithreading is barely better than C++. It's analogous to GOTO. If you want something more structured, try Erlang.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[SanityInAnarchy]

And that's why the JVM is written in Java instead of C/C++ and assembly, right?

Erm, the real reason would be because Java needs the JVM to run. Or what would you run the JVM-written-in-Java on?

For what it's worth, just about all the other tools related to Java are written in Java, very few are written in C/C++ for a performance boost. For example, the Java compiler is written in Java.

But even if what you said was true, I'll gladly take a 40% hit any day of the week in exchange for not ever having another segfault, buffer overrun, or memory leak.

And I don't even like Java.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

All the cool developers are moving to COBOL.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[PCM2]

That's right. The reason everything doesn't always go your way is because everybody else in the world is an idiot, and you're a genius. Geniuses are hated and feared because they are so superior. If people would only think properly (or at all?) then geniuses would take their rightful place as the benevolent kings of this sad world of brainless sheep. Oh well, back to World of Warcraft.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll gladly take a 40% hit any day of the week in exchange for not ever having another segfault, buffer overrun, or memory leak.

So when is Java going to finally provide these things after more than a decade? It's trivially easy to create a Java program that can segfault and leak memory.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your mom's vag is barely better smelling than a rotting fish. Tell her to douche that vag once in a while. If she doesn't shape up I'm gonna have to pimp slap her cause she's driving away all her business.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[FuckingNickName]

Windows, Christianity and Britney Spears also succeeded on technical merit and social benefit.

It's funny to see geeks having been popularised so much over the last decade that the lowest common denominator gaggle together and mock others as they were once bullied by jocks in high school. Therapy, perhaps?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Lunix Nutcase]

or stupidly high resource usage just for the sake of high resource usage

And you're putting this out as a trait that Java doesn't have? ROFL

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Desler]

Still, i prefer the nice, simple look of the average Java windows. Reminds me of older times when OSes just had nice, simple windows, none of this shiny nonsense or stupidly high resource usage just for the sake of high resource usage "since it is there". (I would rather not use my GPU unless needed, thank you! Still have power to pay for now!)

You're correct. Java manages to both look like shit and be resource hungry. The worst of both worlds!

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Desler]

How about generics that don't require tons of boxing and unboxing operations?

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[TemporalBeing]

I don't like Java much myself, but I don't see it going anywhere. A staggering amount of java based (Android?) devices are shipped daily. Once the iPad version is released you may even see some folks switching (back) to it.

Android does not support Java. Android Apps are not Java programs.

Yes, you can develop Android apps in a Java Environment, but they are actually non-Java. To be Java, they would have to run on the Android device in a JavaVM. The Android SDK is simply Java-compatible for ease of us - much like C++ and ObjectiveC are both C compatible.

The Dalvik VM is NOT a JavaVM.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[TemporalBeing]

Java multithreading is barely better than C++. It's analogous to GOTO. If you want something more structured, try Erlang.

Java multithreading is no where near as good as C++ combined with Qt, and there is no need for GOTO in there either. C++ combined with POSIX threads, or MFC Threading, is a bit terrible yes. It's not hard to write a better threading interface. But it'll be hard to beat Qt's threading interface.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[TemporalBeing]

I don't see multiple inheritance as a vital feature. As you've stated, it is possible to work around it without much hassle. So, it may be very useful and convenient but it is not a vital feature.

That being said, the reason I made a point of mentioning multiple inheritance was to point out how absurd LizardKing's comment was. You simply cannot claim that a particular implementation is "so much better" than another when the allegedly better implementation at best implements some fundamental features in a half-assed way and at worse simply fails to implement them. As this is a (somewhat) technical forum, people must limit themselves to the facts regarding the technology and avoid unleashing the fanboy in them to boast about their pet tech through absurd and patently false statements such as the ones which I've pointed out. It diminishes the technology and it denigrates the people who are seriously invested in it.

Suppose you have an API, example Qt, where Templates (e.g. generics) are not allowed. Now suppose you need to implement a feature using Template (e.g. generic), but you need it in an object native to that API. Well, you can do it in one of two ways:

1. Define a template class to do what you need; then define a new class that derives a specific instance of the template and is a native object of the API using MI to get both. Said class can simply be a type definition of the class.
2. Define a template class to do what you need. Then define a new class in the native API that contains an instance of the template class as a protected member with accessors (get/set/etc) for each property and method of the template class.

Which is easier? In case #2 you only have single inheritance but now you have to maintain the whole of new class object. In case #1, you can simply have a class that derives from both; so changes to the template class automatically happen in the new class, and vice versa - the only thing you may have to maintain is the constructor/destructor, but even Stroustrop suggests to not even write those if you can - so you could get away with a simple "class newClass: public apiObject, templateObject {};" for the definition.

Now, why might you need to use a template to do something that way? Certain kinds of solutions - e.g. ring buffers, service applications - are better defined as templates especially when dealing with a multi-platform scenario. However, some APIs - e.g. Qt - don't allow some functionality of languages like C++ due to the inherent complexity. (E.g. Qt's MOC tool would need to be able to fully understand and interoperate with C++ templates; not an easy thing to do.)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[TemporalBeing]

Java has its advantages as a slightly better C++ with a lot of enterprise infrastructure around it. But so much stuff is just painfully almost right with it (the generics as you mentioned, the separation of primitive types and objects, the handling of null, the way it still doesn't have closures...), I find myself hoping C# pushes it aside soon.

C# will never push Java aside. C++ with Qt, or C++ with BOOST may; but never C#.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Have Brain Will Rent]

Right, because the way to decide if something is or isn't doing the job is to look at hold long it has been around and not at what it actually does or doesn't do.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Have Brain Will Rent]

Mmmmm most of the time Java is fine even for embedded devices (which is usually used as a synonym for "limited resources platform") but sometimes it isn't. Every once in a while I do need to use JNI but it is rare. And I can imagine JNI not being adequate in rare cases, because it is a relatively high overhead mechanism, so you might have to write most of an app in C or asm... that's why I also stay capable in both C and asm. :)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Lunix Nutcase]

Hell even goto is actually useful in cases despite the universal parroting of the "GOTO IS BAD!!!" meme of people who misunderstood what Dijkstra was saying.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[ADRA]

I write GOTO's and it annoyed my fellow coworkers like crazy: pretty much only valid goto to make code simpler:

outer: for()
{
      for()
      {
            dostuff();
            if(something)
                  break outer;
            doSomethingElse();
      }
      moreStuffHere();
}

Maybe a continue on a 3 level+ nesting also has merit, but I try to avoid anything that nested if it can be expressed in a simpler manner without losing much performance.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that despite your 5-digits ID you know jack sh!t about MI and you're getting schooled by an AC. Youdon't know anything about OO, actually. At the OOA/OOD level MI is simply MI. Implementation details do not exist at the OOA/OOD level.

Hence, and here's the shocker you're probably not qualified to understand and too old (seen your ID) to adapt your brain too: any single OOA/OOD can be translated to Java using multiple (interface) inheritance.

Your problem is that you're so stuck in the implementation (code) details that you think "MI" means "multiple implementation inheritance".

This is really not so: as a translator, I can translate you *ANY* OOA/OOD making liberal use of MI trivially to Java, using multiple (interface) inheritance.

Implementations are a detail and Java does fully support MI, even if you can't understand it.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[prionic6]

Hey, I was going for "Funny", not "Insightful"...

(Yeah, I get it.)

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Seth Kriticos]

The langpop site has quite a good set of charts, including Google Code and Freshmeat: http://langpop.com/

Did not found any up to date stats on sourceforge, the only statistic circling around is very dated (2006): http://wismuth.com/lang/languages.html

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[m50d]

C++ would be a step backwards. C# or something very like it (possibly even called "Java 9", but even so) will displace Java eventually, simply because it makes one so much more productive, just as Java is displacing C++ and C++ displaced a lot of C. But it'll take a while.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Aerospike]

Absolutely true! I am maintaining a C++ project done by a guy who loved MI and operator overloading and his code is incredibly difficult to understand and debug. I program both in C++ and Java and use delegates in both.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[SanityInAnarchy]

Citation needed.

Even if it's possible, the question is whether I will. I generally write C, even C++, at about half the speed I write Java, which is already fairly slow. I still generate segfaults in C and C++, and I have yet to get a single one in Java, except where I connected via JNI to some code of my own that segfaulted.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[SanityInAnarchy]

there is no need for GOTO in there either.

That's not what I said. I said it's analogous to GOTO. You're still working with the same ideas of locks, mutexes, basically trying to coordinate access to shared memory. Go to something like Erlang, and although memory is still shared under the hood (for speed), you're now working at the level of message passing and shared-nothing architecture.

It really is as profound a shift as the shift from GOTO to structured programming. Global variables and GOTO basically mean you can never know for sure what any one part of your program is doing without being aware of how the entire rest of the program is put together. Local variables and structured programming mean you can reason about one chunk of your program in isolation. That's exactly what Erlang "processes" gain you over threads -- you can reason about one chunk of your program in isolation, even assuming sequential operation, without having to think about what every other thread is doing at the same time.

But it'll be hard to beat Qt's threading interface.

I don't know much about Qt's threading, but does it offer anything dramatically different than locks and mutexes?

Tell you what: I'll go read about Qt's threading, and you go read about Erlang. Then we can come compare notes. But as far as structure and stability, I'll bet Erlang wins.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[LizardKing]

This statement is absurd. Do you happen to know what any C++ programmer must do in order to get all the methods in a class to be virtual? Well, he only needs to state that they are virtual.

You've obviously not worked on codebases where a class that has non-virtual methods that it would be elegant to override where declared non-virtual, and the source cannot be modified - be it because it's in a binary, or policy dictates that you can't modify existing code. This has happened all too often in my experience, as well as programmers thinking they've overridden a method, only to have the object unexpectedly "sliced" when referenced as a superclass type.

If by "performance" you mean noticeable lag on your regular GUI operations then your comment is reasonable.

That tired claim? Most Java code is server side anyway, and the only GUI lag I've seen is when long running callbacks hog the main thread - an issue in C and C++ based GUI toolkits as well.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[Anonymous Coward]

So you worked at a company that employed idiots? I'm shocked I tell you, shocked.

Re:Does anybody still use Java?

[TemporalBeing]

But it'll be hard to beat Qt's threading interface.

I don't know much about Qt's threading, but does it offer anything dramatically different than locks and mutexes?

I'll take a look into Erlang...

Qt does have support for locks and mutexes, and you could certainly use them in the traditional manner. However, it is very easy to write full programs with multiple threads without using a single lock or mutex in Qt and be perfectly safe in doing so if you use an QThread with Qt's Event Loop and Signal/Slot architecture. The whole program becomes very asynchronous as a result, but you never need a lock yourself - Qt's underlying functionality provides all the thread protections you need.

Now some of that is dependent on how you want to use the objects, and requires a big mental shift in programming methodologies. But I'd guess it's probably the same effect that Erlang has - at least from what I can tell from the documentation.

CodePro Windowbuilder Pro

[TheCybernator]

am more interested in CodePro. And what more it has to offer compared to YourKit

All created by a team focused on 1/100th of 1%

[Super Dave Osbourne]

Of the market by using Smalltalk. Its great to Instantiations still in business, and focused on Smalltalk. I find it very perplexing that Google bought the Java tools from them while leaving the Smalltalk business and dev folks behind that used Smalltalk to create these Java tools. When folks finally get to the real world of Smalltalk and its power, and Java is realized for its weaknesses maybe we'll all get back to the real work of creating real tools for real people with real problems to solve.

Re:All created by a team focused on 1/100th of 1%

[FuckingNickName]

We haven't seen a company more keen to take control away from you since IBM. If there's one thing Google will not do, it's create something for real people to solve real problems.

At best, they'll offer to solve sufficiently simple problems for you. Give a man a fish.

Ha

[ledow]

It's Java. That's where my interest ends, especially after Google's own fight with Oracle.

Now if you do integrate a couple of decent C profiling tools, I'd be interested.

Re:Ha

[Anonymous Coward]

It's Java. That's where my interest ends, especially after Google's own fight with Oracle.

It's Eclipse. That's where my interest ends.

Re:Ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Your comments make it abundantly clear that you don't do any development on a large scale enterprise solution. For one simple reason that I can only justify based on my personal anecdotal evidence from working in such an environment:

Production application performance monitoring. This for me is where Java really wins (actually it has NOTHING to do with Java, it's the bytecode that's important)

With Java and code-weaving like AspectJ we can at run time do bytecode instrumentation for performance during production operations. You can not do this with C, at least not easily or cleanly or without re-compiling code. This allows us to build an alarm using a tool like Foglight saying "If on average a request (T3 call across JVMs etc) takes longer than 10 seconds, turn on detailed method tracing". After a few seconds I can drill down on that specific request showing me component breakdown across systems traversed including any SQL calls involve. Where the time is being pissed out, what exceptions are being thrown, which call in the calltree is consuming the most time etc.

Now people will often say something like "Well that's just profiling". Except it's not, because this happens during production, without recompiling anything. There's no "down time" or any special logging that needs to happen and it doesn't affect business. There's this underlying assumption in naive developers minds that IT can hold business at ransom while they fix their crap while that is utterly false.

Re:Ha

[EsbenMoseHansen]

Actually,I believe you can do exactly this with tools like oprofile. But of course, if it was not written in Java you wouldn't need 10 seconds, would you? ;)

Why the Lawyers though.

[seanyboy]

This seems great, but it pisses me off that the lawyers have to get involved. It seems shockingly bad to me that we accept that there has to be lawyers too. That's how deeply they've embedded themselves into software licensing.

Re:Why the Lawyers though.

[Anonymous Coward]

When you operate a multi-national multi-billion dollar company the concept over 'cover your ass' takes on whole new dimensions. It has a lot more to do with Google's stature than it does software licensing.

Re:Why the Lawyers though.

[Anonymous Coward]

Completely agreed.

But sadly in this day and age where software exists in some form as a product across multiple borders, those lawyers are pretty much mandatory so your ass doesn't get handed to you.
The only really good thing you can do is live in a country where things like software patents or protection is a little less retarded.

While IP laws are generally there to protect individuals, this has exploded to monstrous proportions of abuse...
This is also why the web-based platform is a GOOD thing, especially if you develop a network where the entire thing is decentralized, out of control from any government.
Sadly, this isn't likely to happen any time soon, unless huge things happen from those projects like making P2P DNS, P2P web and others.
If only some large-scale projects introduced P2P systems in to their codebase, then it might get somewhere.
But those companies fear just what any other fears when you get "truly" anonymous systems: terrorism, child porn / abuse, human abuse in general, animal abuse, slavery, whatever. To have that linked to your company is bad for image and nobody wants to risk it.
Web Of Trust can help massively, but it won't go away.

Re:Why the Lawyers though.

[StarQuake64]

That must be a gigantic ass if it can reach into new dimensions.

Fantastic news

[Andy Smith]

Love Java. Love Eclipse. Sounds like my IDE of choice is going to get a lot stronger.

Re:Fantastic news

[QuantumG]

Get a room, and don't pay by the hour.. cause I hear you take a while to get started.. :P

Hidden motive?

[Compaqt]

There's another aspect to this.

Oracle's fighting with Google over how they screwed over Sun. Sun's Netbeans Java IDE heretofore had the most innovative free Java GUI designer, the so-called Matisse. Matisse gave Netbeans a major edge vs. Eclipse, the other popular free IDE. And Sun sold services based on Netbeans.

Now, granted, Google's done a lot of stuff out of the goodness of their hearts. But when you have a chance to stick to someone (Oracle) who's suing you, and also get PR points in the process, why not?

Re:Hidden motive?

[icebraining]

Google's internal Java IDE is Eclipse, so improving it is in their direct interest.

Re:Hidden motive?

[Compaqt]

Is it really? I didn't know that.

Don't get me wrong. I applaud the move.

But this is also going to definitely decrease Matisse's uniqueness.

Re:Hidden motive?

[mjwx]

Now, granted, Google's done a lot of stuff out of the goodness of their hearts. But when you have a chance to stick to someone (Oracle) who's suing you, and also get PR points in the process, why not?

Now stabbing your enemies in the stomach is not the definition of evil.

Not being sarcastic, Google and Oracle are embroiled in a serious fight and this is far from the dirtiest trick in the book.

Re:Hidden motive?

[icebraining]

Sorry, not Google's, it's the IDE for Android.

Google developers can use anything, it seems.

Re:Hidden motive?

[tangent3]

I don't think so.

In my opinion, I think Google bought Instantiations for the GWT Designer, easily the best Google Widget Toolkit plugin around for Eclipse, better than Google's own plugin. GWT Designer was available only under a paid proprietary license, and Google wanted it free for all developers to use, so they acquired Instantiations to make GWT Designer free.

Of course, Instantiations owned a lot more than just GWT Designer, and Google doesn't really want to maintain the products other than GWT Designer, so the obvious thing to do would be to donate (or dump, for the cynics) them to Eclipse.

Re:Hidden motive?

[ADRA]

I always thought that the commonly assumed reason for buying them was that they made great a great GWT IDE, and a great GWT IDE means better GWT adoption which means more GWT mindshare. The company was probably available for sale cheaper than building a group would have been, so the reasons are pretty self-evident.

Oh, I could also see them using the team to build out the next generation of Android GUI development tools, because the current iteration of the tool is quite lacking in comparison to the builders these guys have made.

Re:Hidden motive?

[Eskarel]

Which would make sense, except that Oracle are big users of Eclipse and have also donated a tonne of software to the Eclipse foundation. It's possible that Oracle will switch to netbeans now that they own it, but it'd be a fairly major cultural change for software they didn't find worthwhile to begin with.

Java language

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is it that every time an article related to some technology built on Java ends up on Slashdot there's 3 comments regarding the product and another 100 comments with evangelical morons still questioning the currency of the Java language? I want to actually know more about CodePro and WindowBuilder not irrelevant opinions on why Java sucks and they should rather just use brand X where X is any language not Java. Java is used almost exclusively in all major enterprise applications where I work on AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, Linux and Windows operating systems. Scripting languages like Groovy which get interpreted as java bytecode make it even more attractive as you don't have to write "Java" yet still get all the cross-platform goodness that comes with the JVM.

Re:Java language

[Vanderhoth]

It's fear that their personal language of choice is in a decline. I'm a Java developer. When I hear people talking about languages like Python and Ruby I start to think about whether I'm going to have to learn a new Syntax if one of my "hip" clients comes to me and says, "Waddup yo. I wants you to write me a fly app in snake!!".

People are seduced by what's shiny and new. That being said, sometimes you have to kill a dinosaur so a manual can evolve.

Re:Java language

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's really just laughing at you because you think you're "programming" when all you're doing is overglorified scripting. LOL java weenies.

Re:All created by a team focused on 1/100th of 1%

[QuantumG]

And by Smalltalk you mean Objective-C right?

I don't use development tools written in Java

[assertation]

I've been a Java developer for 11 years and I don't use development tools written in Java. While I am gaga over server side Java, I'm not a fan of interpreted code for client applications. I've always had fast machines and Jbuilder/Ecliples/Netbeans and all of the other Java IDEs have lasted for about 15 min with me whenever I have tried a new version. I can't think of anything else more irritating than having to wait for a menu on my development tool to come up. Coworkers always rave to me how _____ has improved and is fast. It has never been true.

I've stuck to Visual Slickedit all of this time. It is written in compiled code, is fast and has a ton of Java support. It also has a ton of support for many other languages so I can use it for everything and not have to learn a new tool.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[Vanderhoth]

You're not running McAfee are you. I run jBuilder on my work machine and Eclipse on my PS3 and laptop. My work machine almost dies every time I start jBuilder and then everything (right click context menus, drop down menus, compiling, debugging, etc...) is insanely slow the first time it's used. I don't have the same problems with my PS3 or laptop.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[assertation]

I see where you are going.

Every place I have ever worked and expect to work has antivirus software. The last place the antivirus software slowed down everything! I had to get more RAM just so I could DO work at 3:30 when it ran everyday.

Yet, I've also used development tools written in Java on my Linux box, even smaller ones like JEdit and the interface is slower.....every time.

Some things I am willing to put with a slowdown for. Just clicking on a menu option for main work tool is not one of them.

The Java community needs to get over the "eat your own dog food" thing with client side apps and development tools. Java is MORE than justified in its existence since it is a FANTASTIC server side language.

It is time to move on.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[angloquebecer]

I can't think of anything else more irritating than having to wait for a menu on my development tool to come up.

This problem isn't unique to Java though. On my current-generation iMac, clicking "Help" in Xcode results in at least a 2-3 second wait for the menu to come up. Maybe it's a bug but it's awfully annoying to wait that long to get to the documentation window.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[assertation]

No, it isn't unique to Java, it is just worse with Java.

I recently had to triple the RAM in Linux/Ubuntu box because GNOME apps load slow.

Like I wrote, a wait is tolerable with some apps, but not a development tool you use all day long. When it is time for me to write code, I'm sticking with Visual Slickedit which is always fast.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[thetoadwarrior]

My guess is you use Windows and have anti virus software.

My desktop machine has 1/3 the ram (1gig) of my work machine and the processor is almost half the speed and yet Netbeans and Eclipse run better. The only difference is my dekstop at home runs Ubuntu and my work machine is XP with McAfee loaded on there as well.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[maztuhblastah]

While I am gaga over server side Java, I'm not a fan of interpreted code for client applications.

Me neither! Fortunately, I can sleep soundly, secure in the knowledge that it hasn't been interpreted for well over a decade (JIT was introduced in 1997 with 1.1).

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[assertation]

Correct if I am wrong, but only non-GUI code is compiled with JIT.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[siride]

There's no difference between GUI code and non-GUI code. What would that even mean?

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[olau]

I think it has more to do with shoddy GUI implementations than anything else. Much of Emacs is written in Emacs Lisp, not exactly a speed demon, and it runs fast enough.

And Visual Studio seems pretty slow to me too, the few times I've had to endure its presence. :)

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[assertation]

I started off with EMACS in school way back in the 20th century. I had to go on a 12 step program to break away from it. I never had any experiences with EMACS being slow...even NTEmacs for Windows. Given the crappy hardware of the era I can't see how it would be slow now.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[Anonymous Coward]

So you are using a Pentium 133 Mhz???

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[radish]

Consider yourself corrected :) Unless you intentionally disable hotspot everything is a candidate for JIT and post-JIT optimizations.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[assertation]

Then why do Java GUI apps perform so poorly?

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[Mongoose Disciple]

My guess is you use Windows and have anti virus software.

I'll admit that's been the setup for most (not all) of the times I personally have done professional Java work.

Thing is, you only can give Eclipse so much cover for running like a one-legged dog in that kind of environment, because most things don't. Actually I can't think of anything that runs as badly as Eclipse in that environment.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[thetoadwarrior]

I'm not sure if Eclipse has gotten better or it's because I've given up on attempting to use too many plugins but I do know Eclipse used to have some really awful default settings which means it would come to a crawl if you start adding in some big plugins. In fact I think it used to use just the default memory settings for Java which I believe means it only had 64 megs to play with.

You had to fix it by other modifying the ini file or startup command on your icon. While that may seem fairly minor I thought I didn't have to do that with Netbeans so I stuck with Netbeans.

IntelliJ is the best all around for options performance, etc but I can't quite bring myself to pay £192 for it and my only open source Java project has only ever had one half assed release. I can't bring myself to give up Python for a bit to give it some care and therefore get a IntelliJ open source licence.

The thing is I think if you use a variety of languages and operating systems then you're stuck with a Java IDE because it appears that's the only cross-platform language people want to use for IDEs.

I use vim for perl, python, php and learning C. PyCharm (intelliJ based) for larger Python projects. I'm not sure I want to use vim for Java. I think I'll make more work for myself than what's worth it as I'm certainly no vim guru.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[Anonymous Coward]

You've been a Java developer for 11 years and you still think the Java bytecode is interpreted? This is seriously pretty sad dude. Java is near C in a lot of the "great language shoutoot" speed benchmarks. And there's no way an interpreted language is getting anywhere close to this level of performance.

Do you have any clue about what "JIT" means? And that either for Java runtime environments or C# runtime environments? (hint: it converts bytecode into native machine code)

The +3 insightful is very, very, sad.
 

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[ADRA]

Eclipse has an iterative compiler. I NEVER wait for a compile unless I've structurally changed a file that is literally used by 100's of classes. That alone is worth its weight in gold.

Re:I don't use development tools written in Java

[ADRA]

The application is as good as its programmer, and GUI programming of ANYTHING takes a baseline of ability. Java is usually used on Web and server platforms, so there are few Java GUI specialists. When a Java programmer is tasked to write a GUI app, it is more often than not a weak knowledge area for the individual. For those that can develop good GUI's in Java, I'm sure they do a great job. Its kind of sad that two of the most popular Java applications (Eclipse, Azareus/Vuze) are written in SWT but that's another problem all together.

Oh, one more point, its easy to write an ugly yet snappy GUI app in say VB because VB does most of the real work behind the scenes, so all you really need to do is drag-drop and event handlers for them. The traditional lack of a good GUI builder in Java means that a lot of developers have to write boiler plate code that may not be as well performing vs. a common and well tuned GUI builder.

Netbeans Cries Fowl

[windcask]

Oracle will be anxiously anticipating their handout in the coming weeks.

Re:CodePro Windowbuilder Pro

[xtracto]

A bit sad:

A Google employee got in touch with The INQUIRER to clarify that Google's donation to the Eclipse project does not include the Codepro Analytix software which it had acquired through Instantiations. The donation only includes Codepro Profiler and Windowbuilder Pro.

GWT

[Yuioup]

I see that WindowBuilder Pro can be used to create GWT GUIs.

Serious question: Does anybody out there use GWT? I went searched for good showcases and didn't find any good examples. If anything the examples tell me to stay away from GWT.

Re:GWT

[wandazulu]

I use GWT. It's a pretty nice toolkit for web pages that is all Java; it compiles the Java to Javascript so there are some classes that you can't use (AWT, Swing, etc.). I've found the performance to be good (certainly better than the big Flex apps I'm using it to replace) and being able to stick with one language through everything is a big plus. You can still use CSS to format the output, so you don't have to stick with a single look or have to dive into the html/javascript to change it.

It's definitely an interesting take on an idea dominated by things like JQuery, Delicious, etc.

Re:GWT

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you use Gmail? Welcome to GWT.

Re:GWT

[Jason-NZ]

Lombari BluePrint - purchased by IBM I think so they changed the name. http://blueworkslive.com/

Also: http://gwtgallery.appspot.com/

Finally keep in mind a large user of GWT Apps is finiancial services / corporate internal applications, so there are many non-public GWT apps out there..

hi...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the first post.... After starting eclipse. ;)

Re:hi...

[gnapster]

I know, right? My first thought was, "Awesome! Now Eclipse will be bigger and more bloated than ever!

Score two for Eclipse

[djpretzel]

Ignoring the expected language-wars comments for a second, this is actually really cool. These were solid, expensive pieces of software that will now reach a wider audience. Netbeans (which I don't use much) was always better than Eclipse in at least this one way - visually building GUIs. It will be nice to see Eclipse achieve parity or exceed its primary free rival in this regard, finally.

Yahoo Store

[bill_mcgonigle]

Scratch that, name me one

Yahoo Store.

(That's not necessarily a recommendation)

IntelliJ?

[SwampChicken]

...no love for IDEa?

And in tonight's Java gossip:

[Sits]

Netbeans developers claim that fowl play is at the heart of the latest Eclipse GUI code and existing steps in that direction may have been responsible for Eclipse's legendary slowness. The developers' claims stem from their exploratory search of the donated code, where a new GUI code a class called "Beak" was found to contain methods such as doPeck(), doSquark(), doScratch(). Further suspicions were raised when an existing Eclipse non-GUI class called Headless was found to be extending Thread class while overriding the run() method.

Apache foundation members were heard murmuring that these revelations should be no surprise given the way the Eclipse Foundation members voted in the recent JCP vote.

Where's my Delorean?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is this the same WindowBuilder Pro I used back in the mid 90's on a Win 16 Smalltalk/V system? What's next great leap forward, VisualAge?