In the way that newbies to programming usually do a "dirty" mess because don't know or care for good practices. Being easy to get started and all. That may be isn't a fault of PHP per se and can happen with any language but I think is common.
1. I programmed a little cobol a couple of years and I can assure you there isn't the least similarity about the two. In fact Cobol (and RPG) programmers usually choke on Java, is very alien to them. Take a look at the syntax, it's based on C.
2. Java is a general language that found it's way into enterprise systems because of its features (platform independence, standard database api, binary compatibility, etc). It was originally developed for embedded systems and is based on C/C++. It was supossed to be a better C++ than C++, without all the clutter, no pointers, no templates (at least until 1.5), etc. There are imaging system, databases, compilers, interpreters (like a python interpreter), games, editors all made in Java. It fullfiled it original purpose somewhat because of its common use in cellphone, mainly for little games. Exercise for home: Try to do a game in Cobol.
3. I don't really understand your point. You don't like business, OO, Sun? Java is used to replace C/C++ in apps than don't require low level access. For example: why do I need to manipulate pointers to make a webpage? clearly java, php, even vb are better suited to the task. Is personal taste what one is more productive with. That doesn't meant that other options are bad.
It's a language similar to cobol in purpose, w/o a lot of the features of cobol that make it harder to work with.
What?? do you have any idea of Cobol and Java or you just trolling? Let me ask: a) What features of Cobol does suposedly Java has? b) why do you say they are similar in purpose? c) harder to work than what?
People hate Java because it's a language that was born of an advertising campaign and not a specific need in the technology field. Wrong. It was born to a specific need (to be used in settop boxes) but it overgrown it quickly. Actually it fits very nicely in my work for a good language, safe, portable, binary compatible, with lots of libraries and high level. If you have other requeriments good for you. Lots of people find it useful.
People hate Java because the technology has been caught in the middle of several commercial interests and platform wars, which has crippled the promise of Java's stability and reliability. Lots of people use it without stability problems. Do you have any actual, real problem?
People hate Java because it's a lie. Java promised a new generation language that was to be cross-platform compatible, but it's actually less cross-platform compatible than C/C++. Do you use a platform that doesn't have a Java implementation or are you just trolling?
People hate Java because it's slow as molasses. Need an example? Take a look at Puzzle Pirates, a very clever multiplayer online game, that because the developers were foolish enough to use Java, runs ten times slower than it should and is painful to use as a result. While some Java applications, usually desktop, may be slower than native ones, server applications don't. In my P4 PC I don't really see any difference between native and Java.
People hate Java because it sucks. I'm sorry to those of you who are Java programmers and are finding less jobs, but no sane company wants to use this technology when there are other systems available that offer better performance, reliability and longevity. "suck" is not an argument. Most probably means that you are a troll.
That was supposed to be serious? then it was pathetic.
Re:Info on what exactly SHA-1 is ...
on
SHA-1 Broken
·
· Score: 1
They are not. You are completly wrong. And SHACAL "is a 160-bit block cipher based on the cryptographic hash function SHA-1." They modified a function inside SHA-1 to make SHACAL.
Are a cryptograpy expert and mathematic that studied formally the problem? because this kind of solution usually just doesn't add to the power of algorithm.
I think we disagree on the terminology. I'll clarify my point of view.
From the faq: The.NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.
core is ECMA/ISO standard high-level-stuff is Microsoft propietary stuff.
.Net is the sum of core and high level stuff, calling the core.Net is at least confusing things. Many people in this discusion talks like.Net is an open standard when it is not. Just the core part is.
That IDEs are optional is good because some people don't like them. With Java you can have many very good IDEs, and you may even do the project using different ones. You even have a couple (Eclipse and Netbeans) that are FOSS. As I see that's a Good Thing.
The.NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms. Mono implements the ECMA/ISO covered parts, as well as being a project that aims to implement the higher level blocks like ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms.
This is exactly what I was saying. ADO.NET, etc are not open standards.
And now with respect to Java: One difference may be that until now there are no really complete enough open source implementations, though efforts like GNU classpath are advancing. One should compare Java to.Net and Mono to Classpath, because those are similar proyects. It's suposedly ok to build an open source Java becasue the Java Community Process (JCP) organization has say so but we will not know until someone really has one finished:-) Another difference is that there are many implementations like BEA JRockit, while in.Net there is only Microsoft one. On other aspects are similar. I just have less trust in Microsoft but I think that technically.Net is at least good. What I really like about Java is: -platform independency (it works wonderfull for me)..Net doesn't have it. (Mono isn't an option right now) -I don't have to reinstall the operating system or reset the computer if something goes wrong, just the process. With MS seems that everything is part of the OS.
That's ok, but people is confusing the two implementations. You can have some.Net compatibility at the cost of (possible) legal problems with Microsoft and another legally unencumbered API but without compability with.Net. You can't have both because the.Net part isn't free. The comment I was replying says ".NET is an ECMA standard." which is not true.
Miguel: I didn't want to imply that, just to point that Java has a kind of proven track and that Mono has yet to achieve that point. Of course that means nothing of the merits of Mono, which I wasn't questioning. I use Java in multiple platforms, something that the grandparent of my post mentioned as not working, something it's clearly wrong to me. There's nothing preventing using Mono, but it is expectable that most people will wait until there's enough critical mass of installed base so they feel safe. After all, who installed Linux at first? students, hackers, people who wanted to experiment. Now you have IBM, HP, Sun, etc. Change happens but usually needs some time to happen.
BTW, something I don't like is people confusing.Net and Mono. People thinks that they will just use their.Net applications in Linux by Mono. I understand this will not be so unless all of.Net APIs are implemented in Mono, but those APIs (like Winforms) are MS patented? Can an API be patented or only the implementation?
2) foreach (versus for loops) Last version of Java (1.5) has this.
3) Properties (versus accessor methods) Java doesn't have, and I'm grateful for this. I think that this obscures the code, though it may let you write a little less.
4) Boxing/Unboxing (versus Classes for intregal types--also used as the "implicit" operator) Last version of Java (1.5) has this.
From what I understand,.NET is an ECMA standard. This can be verified here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/ecma/. They even post a C# specification, so really anyone with the talent can implement it.
Perhaps you should read your own link. Only C# and CLI are ECMA approved standard. The other 80% of.Net (aprox.) is Microsoft property.
If I need to debug a program I fail to see how piping the compiler through the debbuger would help me. Perhaps I should replace my graphical editor where every function is a few clicks away, with sed to really became productive. And my word processor and spreadsheet surely are living fosills. I should be changing my cable modem with Internet thru a pipe to get broadband (get it? bigger pipe).
Slashdot Mirror
It's not dirty, but it's easier to write ugly code using PHP.
;-)
That's dirty
In the way that newbies to programming usually do a "dirty" mess because don't know or care for good practices. Being easy to get started and all.
That may be isn't a fault of PHP per se and can happen with any language but I think is common.
as I sayed may be I really didn't understand your point ;-)
1. I programmed a little cobol a couple of years and I can assure you there isn't the least similarity about the two. In fact Cobol (and RPG) programmers usually choke on Java, is very alien to them. Take a look at the syntax, it's based on C.
2. Java is a general language that found it's way into enterprise systems because of its features (platform independence, standard database api, binary compatibility, etc). It was originally developed for embedded systems and is based on C/C++. It was supossed to be a better C++ than C++, without all the clutter, no pointers, no templates (at least until 1.5), etc.
There are imaging system, databases, compilers, interpreters (like a python interpreter), games, editors all made in Java.
It fullfiled it original purpose somewhat because of its common use in cellphone, mainly for little games.
Exercise for home: Try to do a game in Cobol.
3. I don't really understand your point. You don't like business, OO, Sun?
Java is used to replace C/C++ in apps than don't require low level access. For example: why do I need to manipulate pointers to make a webpage? clearly java, php, even vb are better suited to the task. Is personal taste what one is more productive with. That doesn't meant that other options are bad.
It's a language similar to cobol in purpose, w/o a lot of the features of cobol that make it harder to work with.
What?? do you have any idea of Cobol and Java or you just trolling?
Let me ask:
a) What features of Cobol does suposedly Java has?
b) why do you say they are similar in purpose?
c) harder to work than what?
People hate Java because it's a language that was born of an advertising campaign and not a specific need in the technology field.
Wrong. It was born to a specific need (to be used in settop boxes) but it overgrown it quickly.
Actually it fits very nicely in my work for a good language, safe, portable, binary compatible, with lots of libraries and high level.
If you have other requeriments good for you. Lots of people find it useful.
People hate Java because the technology has been caught in the middle of several commercial interests and platform wars, which has crippled the promise of Java's stability and reliability.
Lots of people use it without stability problems. Do you have any actual, real problem?
People hate Java because it's a lie. Java promised a new generation language that was to be cross-platform compatible, but it's actually less cross-platform compatible than C/C++.
Do you use a platform that doesn't have a Java implementation or are you just trolling?
People hate Java because it's slow as molasses. Need an example? Take a look at Puzzle Pirates, a very clever multiplayer online game, that because the developers were foolish enough to use Java, runs ten times slower than it should and is painful to use as a result.
While some Java applications, usually desktop, may be slower than native ones, server applications don't. In my P4 PC I don't really see any difference between native and Java.
People hate Java because it sucks. I'm sorry to those of you who are Java programmers and are finding less jobs, but no sane company wants to use this technology when there are other systems available that offer better performance, reliability and longevity.
"suck" is not an argument. Most probably means that you are a troll.
I guess I'm going to flamed/modded down but...
Isn't PHP the Visual Basic of this age? it's easy, it's dirty, it's quick to do simple apps.
That was supposed to be serious? then it was pathetic.
They are not. You are completly wrong. And SHACAL "is a 160-bit block cipher based on the cryptographic hash function SHA-1." They modified a function inside SHA-1 to make SHACAL.
Are a cryptograpy expert and mathematic that studied formally the problem? because this kind of solution usually just doesn't add to the power of algorithm.
Take a look at the last Richard Grimes article on .Net. Very very interesting stuff.
I think we disagree on the terminology. I'll clarify my point of view.
.NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.
.NET = core + high-level-stuff
.Net is the sum of core and high level stuff, calling the core .Net is at least confusing things. Many people in this discusion talks like .Net is an open standard when it is not. Just the core part is.
From the faq: The
core = C# + CLI
high-level-stuff = ADO.NET, ASP.NET, Windows.Forms
core is ECMA/ISO standard
high-level-stuff is Microsoft propietary stuff.
That IDEs are optional is good because some people don't like them. With Java you can have many very good IDEs, and you may even do the project using different ones. You even have a couple (Eclipse and Netbeans) that are FOSS. As I see that's a Good Thing.
What problems did you have with Java platform compatibility?
The .NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.
.Net and Mono to Classpath, because those are similar proyects. :-) .Net there is only Microsoft one. .Net is at least good. .Net doesn't have it. (Mono isn't an option right now)
Mono implements the ECMA/ISO covered parts, as well as being a project that aims to implement the higher level blocks like ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms.
This is exactly what I was saying. ADO.NET, etc are not open standards.
And now with respect to Java:
One difference may be that until now there are no really complete enough open source implementations, though efforts like GNU classpath are advancing.
One should compare Java to
It's suposedly ok to build an open source Java becasue the Java Community Process (JCP) organization has say so but we will not know until someone really has one finished
Another difference is that there are many implementations like BEA JRockit, while in
On other aspects are similar. I just have less trust in Microsoft but I think that technically
What I really like about Java is:
-platform independency (it works wonderfull for me).
-I don't have to reinstall the operating system or reset the computer if something goes wrong, just the process. With MS seems that everything is part of the OS.
That's ok, but people is confusing the two implementations. You can have some .Net compatibility at the cost of (possible) legal problems with Microsoft and another legally unencumbered API but without compability with .Net. You can't have both because the .Net part isn't free. The comment I was replying says ".NET is an ECMA standard." which is not true.
Miguel:
.Net and Mono. People thinks that they will just use their .Net applications in Linux by Mono. I understand this will not be so unless all of .Net APIs are implemented in Mono, but those APIs (like Winforms) are MS patented? Can an API be patented or only the implementation?
I didn't want to imply that, just to point that Java has a kind of proven track and that Mono has yet to achieve that point. Of course that means nothing of the merits of Mono, which I wasn't questioning. I use Java in multiple platforms, something that the grandparent of my post mentioned as not working, something it's clearly wrong to me.
There's nothing preventing using Mono, but it is expectable that most people will wait until there's enough critical mass of installed base so they feel safe. After all, who installed Linux at first? students, hackers, people who wanted to experiment. Now you have IBM, HP, Sun, etc. Change happens but usually needs some time to happen.
BTW, something I don't like is people confusing
Good Luck, from Argentina
Alejandro
And Java has a hell of more production sites than Mono.
This is very nice, until Windows programmers find there is no Visual Studio for Linux/Mono. I will understand them.
1) Events
Don't know what is this
2) foreach (versus for loops)
Last version of Java (1.5) has this.
3) Properties (versus accessor methods)
Java doesn't have, and I'm grateful for this. I think that this obscures the code, though it may let you write a little less.
4) Boxing/Unboxing (versus Classes for intregal types--also used as the "implicit" operator)
Last version of Java (1.5) has this.
From what I understand, .NET is an ECMA standard. This can be verified here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/net/ecma/. They even post a C# specification, so really anyone with the talent can implement it.
.Net (aprox.) is Microsoft property.
Perhaps you should read your own link. Only C# and CLI are ECMA approved standard. The other 80% of
Can you support your comment? CLI and C# are ECMA/ISO standards but .Net API is not. Please provide a link showing it otherwise.
No, it would be hot. May be beautiful woman with smaller clothes is the cause of global warming?
The first bomb was made in 1945, how dificult should be now? provided that you have the radioactive materials of course.
If I need to debug a program I fail to see how piping the compiler through the debbuger would help me. Perhaps I should replace my graphical editor where every function is a few clicks away, with sed to really became productive. And my word processor and spreadsheet surely are living fosills. I should be changing my cable modem with Internet thru a pipe to get broadband (get it? bigger pipe).
But don't worry, it must be me.