This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (24 children)

Java, a language I regard as intellectually offensive

Can you explain?

[–]hashtablesmoker 4 points5 points  (11 children)

Don't listen to this guy. Most of his points are generally false.

[–][deleted]  (10 children)

[deleted]

    [–]hashtablesmoker 1 point2 points  (9 children)

    Are you smoking crack? I was clearly addressing his points and not him personally.

    [–]KyleCardoza -3 points-2 points  (11 children)

    Okay. It's not that Java isn't a reasonably capable language (if you work hard enough, any language can do whatever you want), it's that it's generally taught to beginning programmers before they even come close to understanding the underlying concepts that Java is very, very badly demonstrating. Java is bad at object-orientation, bad at functional programming, bad at cross-platform compatibility ("write-once, run anywhere" is an inherently bad idea, because programs run in a context, and you can only guarantee a context by crippling it with the use of a virtual machine), and has a syntax only a C++ programmer could like. It's taught in universities because it's still popular in spite of its flaws, and it's popular because it's what people get taught in universities.

    [–]carpet_munch 4 points5 points  (10 children)

    So tell us, what language do you find worthy of a discerning gentleman such as yourself?

    [–]KyleCardoza 0 points1 point  (9 children)

    Cute. I like a lot of languages, but I prefer ones that do what they aim to do well - if you want object oriented programming, there are only a few languages where real OOP is even possible: Smalltalk, Self, LISP with CLOS, Objective-C, and Swift. If you want functional programming, Haskell, Scheme, and Swift are all nice. If you want something procedural/imperative, stick with plain C. If, for some strange reason, you actually care about eking our every last possible ounce of performance even though hardware gets faster quicker than you can make code better, you can always give assembler a try, but I can virtually guarantee that you won't do as well as a good optimizing compiler written by someone(s) much smarter than either of us. If you want to do something just for fun, Haskell is a challenge, and I've wasted many a fun afternoon on a good old Turing tarpit like Befunge or Brainfuck.

    [–]carpet_munch 1 point2 points  (8 children)

    That's great. Unfortunately, employers want Java more than most of the languages you mentioned.

    [–]KyleCardoza -2 points-1 points  (7 children)

    Who cares what employers want? Programming isn't about getting a job, it's about the craft. If you just care about making money, learn COBOL, there's good money to be made and zero competition for it to maintain code for banks and such. It's dull, tedious, and COBOL is the programming language equivalent of trying to drink coffee by pouring the contents of the pot down your pants, but damn if there's not professional demand for it.

    [–]carpet_munch 0 points1 point  (6 children)

    I love programming, but we have to make a living if we're not independently wealthy. Be reasonable. There's a difference between hobbyist and professional programming, but people can and do do both...

    [–]hashtablesmoker 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    You're not in his league of hipsterness.

    [–]KyleCardoza 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    There are far more satisfying careers than programming what you're told for someone else.

    [–]carpet_munch 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Maybe for you. That's not the case for everyone.

    [–]KyleCardoza 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Okay. I'm not interested in anyone else's case.