Re:Mod submitter -1, Troll
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Wrong. The whole point being Visual Studio 7 was to support the new.NET technologies. So much so that they dropped the popular pre-.NET Visual Basic in favor of a new.NET version of it.
This is actually quite far from the truth. While.Net was one of the reasons to push VS7 (and change the name to Visual Studio.Net), VS 2003 is miles ahead of Visual Studio 6 in many other fields, especially the compliance of the C++ compiler to the standard. And VS 2005 improves it even further.
Re:And when they say "LAMP"
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Except that it's spelt LAPR, as in Linux Apache PosgreSQL Ruby.
Hey, PHP has AT LEAST 25 different functions to escape quotes in SQL data (and 10 people on earth who actually know which one is the only one to work) (and god forbid the devs just got rid of the 24 ones that don't work). So it must be good 'k?
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
JSP tags w/ expression language-- I barely need to code inside of a JSP page. JSP works as the ideal 'pure templating language' along w/ CSS.
Smarty, or any other templating language, just use the one you want.
The option to move into full-fledged J2EE (scalability)
Unnecessary until proven required, over-engineering should be a cardinal sin, KISS
The language and libraries, while maybe not well implemented, are extremely well thought-out.
Until you've tried more dynamic languages (see Ruby, see Python)
Very standardized.
Which is not a bad thing. On the other hand, users don't have much to say in the direction the language takes (PHP is even worse in that aspect though)
Those that don't want to track the versions of all their supplementary libraries need not worry. Sun and Apache have nearly everything you'll need.
Every good languages is available with batteries included, and this point has no relation with the previous one.
Oh, and keeping track of the Apache libs versions is still a pain, you should check Ruby's Gems for a nice painless libs-handling tool. It's like apt-get at the language level.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
If we could have the same thing for Java (or any other language) I am sure we could have 2 or 3 virtual machines competing against each other.
Only Sun has a stable 1.5 JVM, but there are multiple 1.3 and 1.4 JVMs...
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Classes are still not objects, functions and methods are still not objects, packages are still not objects, and auto-boxing doesn't work for calling methods on primitive types (or didn't last time I checked) so primitive types are not objects.
Everything is definitely not an object in java, and the JVM's abstactions leak like sieves.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 2, Informative
everything is an object
That's so wrong it hurts.
Primitive types are not objects, nor are functions, methods, or class.
Check Smalltalk, Ruby or Python (for example) to see what "everything is an object" truly means.
A class is an object, a module is an object, a function is an object, every single built-in type is an object. THAT is an everything is an object approach.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 2, Informative
First, it deserves credit as the first of the truly wonderful cross-platform, virtual machine driven JIT compilation using languages.
That would be Smalltalk.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
java is a multithreaded platform that runs across most servers that you can meet todays. it runs on windows,linux,os x, solaris, bsd so it has most of the parts covered. it doesn't need code recompilation nor does it need the developer to be aware of what the platform actually does beneath. people that have done lots of cross platform stuff in C know that this is a living hell from some point on.
Java's "Write once run everywhere" motto is a joke, and everyone knows it. I've never seen any serious developper that could tell me he was able to make Java code flawlessly run on every plateform.
Sadly, the truth is much closer to "Java, Write once Debug everywhere"...
java and python are the ones that are fighting for the throne of opensource application servers and services.
Even though i'm more of a pythonista, don't forget Ruby here, it got a LOT of momentum fropm Ruby on Rails and the language itself deserves fame. It's well built, flexible, stable, and clearly the best competitor of Python.
Good Python or Ruby code is much sexier, just as rock solid and probably more reuseable if that could be quantified...
Your point?
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
Of course, marketing always sells products as salvation
There is not much Python marketting, because there is no Big Business behind Python;)
so I'd probably have to talk to the programmers to see what they like and dislike about it
For most of the people that are very new to Python, the fact that leading whitespace are significant is a kind of a turn-off. Until they realize that they just have to indent as they'd do anyway (to have readable code) and it Just Works. Other than that, the explicit 'this' (called 'self' by convention) in classes is disliked by some and loved by others, and most people that come from C++ or Javaland are horrified by the fact that Python has no concept of compiler-enforced "private" or even "protected", everything is public ("we're all consenting adults" and all), and only convensions tell you that "you know you're not supposed to use that, don't whine if it breaks" and "you know, you really really shouldn't use that because it WILL break sooner than later, and when it will you'll be in a damn impressive heap of dung".
On the plus side, there are too many things pythonistas love about python, i'll let you discover them (hint: there is a "live" interpreter, use and abuse it it's a darn cool feature)
BTW, after installing python, the first thing you should type in the command line is "python -m this".
I promise to look deeper into python:)
Do also check Ruby, wether or not Python turns you on, it's an other extremely nice language that got quite a lot of deserved hype lately thanks to Ruby on Rails (quite a shame it needed RoR to get to be known in the western world though).
Re:The 'P' in LAMP
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Does the 'P' mean Perl, PHP, or Python? Or, does it mean all three?
Any of the three
If I were a young programmer, which language would I select? (I suppose I would select the language depending on the task at hand. In any event, it seems to me that almost anything will produce results faster than Java.)
If you want to be able to code in the large sense, not specifically for the web, I'd advertise Python. Or Ruby. Both languages are really good to build offline applications, and just as good for online apps (websites or webapps). Clean, powerful, OO-based yet multiparadigm (the languages are OO, but you don't HAVE to use OO).
If all you want is build a quick website, PHP is the easiest but the ugliest.
Perl gives mixed feelings, the syntax is strange, the code (as in PHP) extremely easily turns into a gooey sticky mess (Perl is often described as a Write Only language), the OO is a hack, but Perl is unrivaled for a few hundred lines of heavy string manipulation. Beyond that, it's a pain to keep it readable.
Issue is that PHP is not modular. There are no modules, no namespaces, the scopes are half baked, the syntax is fugly, the OO is a pityful hack and the constructs are stupid.
It takes a hellish work to prevent a PHP application from turning into a strange gooey mess, because that's the way the language is designed. Modularity, clarity, cleanness, were never considered when PHP was first created. And then they kept adding layers upong layers of dung.
If you want languages that help you use clean and modular designs, check Ruby (and Ruby on Rails on the web), check Python. Yes, you can write crap in these languages (hell, you can write FORTRAN in every language), but that's not what the tutorials and documentations show you, that's not how 90% of the code is written, and that's not what the guys will tell you to do on comp.lang.(Ruby|Python)
the P of LAMP doesn't actually force you to use PHP, Perl and Python work just as well. And Ruby fits the bill too, even though it's name doesn't start with P (LAMP should really be called LAMS, actually)
Here's a tip. Programming languages and platforms aren't sexy
Yes they are, coding in Ruby or Python is actually geniuinely fun and rewarding. Not having the language go in the way and prevent you from thinking about the program (the forest) because you have to think about the code (the tree) is like discovering programmation over again. Being 5 times more productive with a third of the code lines without losing any clarity or expressiveness (quite the opposite in fact) is refreshing.
There is no reason for programming language to not be sexy but the ones you accept when you use crappy languages.
I perfectly agree with the "Use the right tool for the right job", you can't use high level interpreted language when performances and memory footpring are issues, but you won't use Java either anyway...
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
I guess my big concern with LAMP is what the hell is the P? PHP? Python? Perl? They're all very powerful and they all have their own positives and negatives in regards to quick scripting solutions, but all of them still allow bad programs to churn our badly written programs. I'm guessing that is the trade-off: the more complex programs you can write, the more likely you are to see badly written programs.
You've never actually written python code have you?
You are clearly not a developper. If one is in the middleware business, that is making software libraries for specific hardware or entire engines, the raw performance is very good indicator of the life time of that system. Longer life time means sustained profits
We're not talking about middleware business here, we're talking about game consoles. Game consoles work by generations, and even if your gen 2 console is really gen 2.5 because it far outperforms regular gen 2, you still have to release a gen 3 console when you competitors release theirs (within 12-18 months at worst, and use craploads of PR to prevent people from switching to the available alternatives).
Quality SDKs are made by the likes of iD, Havok, Epic,... Companies you have to convince investing in your system, see previous point.
Excuse me? iD, Havok or Epic make GAMES, they don't make console Software Development Kits. The one who makes and releases a SDK for a console is the manufacturer of the console, and from the echos I got Sony's SDK for the PS3 is a piece of crap, MS' SDK for the 360 is a really good piece of software and Nintendo's Revolution SDK is average.
Because the best games, are rushed games?
No, because good tools make you more likely to get the same quality of games with a less dev and debugging, and because good tools are enjoyed by devs who -- in turn -- are much more interrested in devving for your plateform.
You mean backwards compatibility, right?
No I don't, backward compatibility is an extremely defensive feature, its main goal is to lock your current customers into your product lines in order to prevent them from fleeing to the opponent's product. It may convert *some* people, but backward compatibility doesn't generate user base growth, at best a transfert of your user base from your old generation to your new generation product. It's a Good Thing, but it's far from enough. And even your old customers ain't going to be interrested in your product if the only thing they can do with it is play previous generation's game. Because they already have a system that can do that.
Yet again, no it wouldn't, the Xbox360 CPU is extremely different from Macs' Power970 chips, they're not designed towards the same goals and the Xbox360 CPU doesn't come from the Power4 core line
Not too well; I think it is highly a specialized G5.
It's not, it would at best be a heavily stripped down G5, if it were from the Power4 line (as G5's Power970 comes from). It's not. IBM has at least 2 or 3 quite different PowerPC cores from which it builds PowerPC "custom", the Power4 line (that yielded Power970 chips) would be the high end, extremely complex and powerful chips. Xbox360 comes from a far less powerful and complex PPC line, but one that's been heavily tuned for parallelization and high frequencies.
PS3 will have better graphical performance, up to 2x. High definition. Blu-ray. Up to 7 wireless controllers - those actually mean something.
Which is about as interresting as hyping Intel's 4GHz pentiums.
No one gives a flying fuck about the raw performances of the machine, high definition is not for consoles anyway (hint: my computer yields above twice "HD"), blu-ray blows (not the least because it uses Java as a "mandatory part of the standard).
Three things really matter for consoles:
Quality of the SDK to get games fast and happy devs
Games. Good games, and lots of games.
Allowing good and original gameplays.
Now please take your PS-fanboyism back to the Sony board, the numbers will speak when the PS3 is released, until PS3 is live it's mere FUD and vapor wall.
Slashdot Mirror
This is actually quite far from the truth. While .Net was one of the reasons to push VS7 (and change the name to Visual Studio .Net), VS 2003 is miles ahead of Visual Studio 6 in many other fields, especially the compliance of the C++ compiler to the standard. And VS 2005 improves it even further.
Except that it's spelt LAPR, as in Linux Apache PosgreSQL Ruby.
Hey, PHP has AT LEAST 25 different functions to escape quotes in SQL data (and 10 people on earth who actually know which one is the only one to work) (and god forbid the devs just got rid of the 24 ones that don't work). So it must be good 'k?
Since when is it possible to read Perl code beyond a few hundred lines of the stuff?
C was created in 1971, hardly "so 80's"
C++ is so 80's (1983), as well as ADA (1979).
Unnecessary until proven required, over-engineering should be a cardinal sin, KISS
Until you've tried more dynamic languages (see Ruby, see Python)
Which is not a bad thing. On the other hand, users don't have much to say in the direction the language takes (PHP is even worse in that aspect though)
Every good languages is available with batteries included, and this point has no relation with the previous one.
Oh, and keeping track of the Apache libs versions is still a pain, you should check Ruby's Gems for a nice painless libs-handling tool. It's like apt-get at the language level.
Only Sun has a stable 1.5 JVM, but there are multiple 1.3 and 1.4 JVMs...
Classes are still not objects, functions and methods are still not objects, packages are still not objects, and auto-boxing doesn't work for calling methods on primitive types (or didn't last time I checked) so primitive types are not objects.
Everything is definitely not an object in java, and the JVM's abstactions leak like sieves.
That's so wrong it hurts.
Primitive types are not objects, nor are functions, methods, or class.
Check Smalltalk, Ruby or Python (for example) to see what "everything is an object" truly means.
A class is an object, a module is an object, a function is an object, every single built-in type is an object. THAT is an everything is an object approach.
That would be Smalltalk.
Java's "Write once run everywhere" motto is a joke, and everyone knows it. I've never seen any serious developper that could tell me he was able to make Java code flawlessly run on every plateform.
Sadly, the truth is much closer to "Java, Write once Debug everywhere"...
Even though i'm more of a pythonista, don't forget Ruby here, it got a LOT of momentum fropm Ruby on Rails and the language itself deserves fame. It's well built, flexible, stable, and clearly the best competitor of Python.
Good Python or Ruby code is much sexier, just as rock solid and probably more reuseable if that could be quantified...
Your point?
For most of the people that are very new to Python, the fact that leading whitespace are significant is a kind of a turn-off. Until they realize that they just have to indent as they'd do anyway (to have readable code) and it Just Works. Other than that, the explicit 'this' (called 'self' by convention) in classes is disliked by some and loved by others, and most people that come from C++ or Javaland are horrified by the fact that Python has no concept of compiler-enforced "private" or even "protected", everything is public ("we're all consenting adults" and all), and only convensions tell you that "you know you're not supposed to use that, don't whine if it breaks" and "you know, you really really shouldn't use that because it WILL break sooner than later, and when it will you'll be in a damn impressive heap of dung".
On the plus side, there are too many things pythonistas love about python, i'll let you discover them (hint: there is a "live" interpreter, use and abuse it it's a darn cool feature)
BTW, after installing python, the first thing you should type in the command line is "python -m this".
Do also check Ruby, wether or not Python turns you on, it's an other extremely nice language that got quite a lot of deserved hype lately thanks to Ruby on Rails (quite a shame it needed RoR to get to be known in the western world though).
If you want to be able to code in the large sense, not specifically for the web, I'd advertise Python. Or Ruby. Both languages are really good to build offline applications, and just as good for online apps (websites or webapps). Clean, powerful, OO-based yet multiparadigm (the languages are OO, but you don't HAVE to use OO).
If all you want is build a quick website, PHP is the easiest but the ugliest.
Perl gives mixed feelings, the syntax is strange, the code (as in PHP) extremely easily turns into a gooey sticky mess (Perl is often described as a Write Only language), the OO is a hack, but Perl is unrivaled for a few hundred lines of heavy string manipulation. Beyond that, it's a pain to keep it readable.
Issue is that PHP is not modular. There are no modules, no namespaces, the scopes are half baked, the syntax is fugly, the OO is a pityful hack and the constructs are stupid.
It takes a hellish work to prevent a PHP application from turning into a strange gooey mess, because that's the way the language is designed. Modularity, clarity, cleanness, were never considered when PHP was first created. And then they kept adding layers upong layers of dung.
If you want languages that help you use clean and modular designs, check Ruby (and Ruby on Rails on the web), check Python. Yes, you can write crap in these languages (hell, you can write FORTRAN in every language), but that's not what the tutorials and documentations show you, that's not how 90% of the code is written, and that's not what the guys will tell you to do on comp.lang.(Ruby|Python)
the P of LAMP doesn't actually force you to use PHP, Perl and Python work just as well. And Ruby fits the bill too, even though it's name doesn't start with P (LAMP should really be called LAMS, actually)
Yes they are, coding in Ruby or Python is actually geniuinely fun and rewarding. Not having the language go in the way and prevent you from thinking about the program (the forest) because you have to think about the code (the tree) is like discovering programmation over again. Being 5 times more productive with a third of the code lines without losing any clarity or expressiveness (quite the opposite in fact) is refreshing.
There is no reason for programming language to not be sexy but the ones you accept when you use crappy languages.
I perfectly agree with the "Use the right tool for the right job", you can't use high level interpreted language when performances and memory footpring are issues, but you won't use Java either anyway...
You've never actually written python code have you?
We're not talking about middleware business here, we're talking about game consoles. Game consoles work by generations, and even if your gen 2 console is really gen 2.5 because it far outperforms regular gen 2, you still have to release a gen 3 console when you competitors release theirs (within 12-18 months at worst, and use craploads of PR to prevent people from switching to the available alternatives).
Excuse me? iD, Havok or Epic make GAMES, they don't make console Software Development Kits. The one who makes and releases a SDK for a console is the manufacturer of the console, and from the echos I got Sony's SDK for the PS3 is a piece of crap, MS' SDK for the 360 is a really good piece of software and Nintendo's Revolution SDK is average.
No, because good tools make you more likely to get the same quality of games with a less dev and debugging, and because good tools are enjoyed by devs who -- in turn -- are much more interrested in devving for your plateform.
No I don't, backward compatibility is an extremely defensive feature, its main goal is to lock your current customers into your product lines in order to prevent them from fleeing to the opponent's product. It may convert *some* people, but backward compatibility doesn't generate user base growth, at best a transfert of your user base from your old generation to your new generation product. It's a Good Thing, but it's far from enough. And even your old customers ain't going to be interrested in your product if the only thing they can do with it is play previous generation's game. Because they already have a system that can do that.
Yet again, no it wouldn't, the Xbox360 CPU is extremely different from Macs' Power970 chips, they're not designed towards the same goals and the Xbox360 CPU doesn't come from the Power4 core line
It wouldn't, it's not designed to run the kind of tasks you run on a regular computer.
It's not, it would at best be a heavily stripped down G5, if it were from the Power4 line (as G5's Power970 comes from). It's not. IBM has at least 2 or 3 quite different PowerPC cores from which it builds PowerPC "custom", the Power4 line (that yielded Power970 chips) would be the high end, extremely complex and powerful chips. Xbox360 comes from a far less powerful and complex PPC line, but one that's been heavily tuned for parallelization and high frequencies.
That's completely wrong, the XBox 360 chip and the Power970 lines, although both being "PowerPC" chips are actually extremely different.
Which is about as interresting as hyping Intel's 4GHz pentiums.
No one gives a flying fuck about the raw performances of the machine, high definition is not for consoles anyway (hint: my computer yields above twice "HD"), blu-ray blows (not the least because it uses Java as a "mandatory part of the standard).
Three things really matter for consoles:
Now please take your PS-fanboyism back to the Sony board, the numbers will speak when the PS3 is released, until PS3 is live it's mere FUD and vapor wall.
But for the custom motherboard, custom CPU, custom GPU i guess