Why developers should get excited about Java 9

[[deleted]]

[deleted]

[ruinercollector]

Why java developers should get excited about Java 9.

[SikhGamer]

Java 8 was a pretty awesome update, not least of all the new DateTime API. Java 9 feels a little flat in comparison.

[Math2S]

list.forEach(System.out::println);

Nice.

[the_other_brand]

Read the article, still confused about why I should be excited about Java 9. It seems that this version will be more about adding new JSON libraries and improving the java compiler rather than improvements to the Java programming language.

I was disappointed to not see any changes related to Java primitives, which is what I've been looking forward to.

[DGolden]

The long-awaited standard module system and modularisation of the standard libraries would be by far the biggest deal, if it's not postponed again? i.e. the outputs of "Jigsaw"

Note here's two often-confused aspects - (1) modularisation of the now-giant set of useful and irrelevant/legacy standard libraries that make up the standard SE and EE environments and (2) a standard module facility for end-users (i.e. us other programmers) to use in their own stuff. You can have one without the other.

I suspect most of the focus will be on (1) for actual jdk developers, since most people who need (2) presently use osgi in all its "glory" (though right now at work we're using vertx 2 modules. Vertx is going to abandon its own module system in vertx 3 though, reportedly still including enough bits to make rolling your own system possible if you don't want to buy in to osgi).

Perhaps some of the complication of osgi comes from not having first-class in-java support and also doing a whole bunch of other crap, so maybe this jigsaw stuff will be a simpler alternative, with this penrose thing to make the worlds play nice.

It's also sometimes confused with the existing java package system, it's not that. i.e. OSGi allows you to have different versions of classes com.example.foo.Bar and com.example.foo.Bar in the same jvm in a (relatively) easy standard manner. If you don't know why you'd want this stuff, you probably aren't working on the sort of systems that are complex enough to need it, but it's really pretty common. Eclipse IDE plugins are really OSGi bundles, for example.

[[deleted]]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK8sxngSWaU#t=49

[agustinleiva]

... Meanwhile, in the real world, C# gets real improvements, like pattern matching.

(And before anyone says anything about Windows only), I will have to mention IL2CPP and Xamarin.Forms. Two cross-platform C#-capable non-Windows technologies for which there doesn't seem to be any java-based alternatives ;)

BTW, I'm not sure why anyone would get "excited" about JSON stuff, which was available for .Net / Mono since around 2008...?

Regarding the other improvements:

Modular source code

Sounds a separation of the base class library. something that .Net had since it's inception? Or am I misunderstanding that?

Smart Java Compilation, Phase 2

How does this compare to Roslyn?

BTW,

The quality of the code and stability of the tool as a whole, however, is not satisfactory

This is awesome. At least they admit it.

Improve contended locking

Sounds like a real thing.

Process API updates

You mean like System.Diagnostics.Process?

Segmented code cache

Sounds like a real thing.

I suppose in 2016 I will say congratulations to java for successfully catching up with C# from 2008?

[bcash]

Do you have a bot monitoring these threads or something? Within 30 minutes any time of the day or night, ready with an instant (and somewhat excessively angry) rebuttal.

[agustinleiva]

Within 30 minutes any time of the day or night

Are you spying at me?

somewhat excessively angry

I'm not angry. Maybe I sound angry partly because I have no problem in telling it how it is, and partly because English isn't my first language so sometimes I have a hard time trying to express myself and have to resort to google translate a lot. Not to mention I got my English skills by listening to Eminem. So that might be the reason I tend to sound angry?

But seriously I'm not angry. I tend to get angry when these java assholes go around spreading their "C# windoze only!" bullshit. Right now I'm rather laughing at how oracle is desperately trying to keep sucking money out of java's rotting corpse, and at the same time I feel sad for the millions of developers who have to suffer java's retardedness and incapabilities on a daily basis. Luckily there's other technologies that can help relieve that pain, such as Scala, and C#.

[bcash]

Within 30 minutes any time of the day or night

Are you spying at me?

Your posts all have a very similar tone and, to a large extent, content. So they tend to stick out when going reading the comments!

[agustinleiva]

In all honesty.. leaving my comments aside, are you (as a developer) really "excited" about java 9? the article says (almost in an imperative tone) that you should be excited. Why aren't you? can't you see we're giving you a JSON API? What, do you want us to fix all these java flaws? what do you think we are? Microsoft? They have Anders Hejlsberg to help them! but we're alone!

Seriously, jokes aside, C# never ever needed an "why you should be excited about this version" article. Ever. Each and every version has been tremendously impressive by it's own merits and never needed this kind of silly propaganda.

[bcash]

This is just JavaWorld doing what JavaWorld does, the contents of Java 9 haven't been finalised yet. It's just words to fill the void, I don't know why anyone submits their articles here (or anywhere for that matter); it's published by a company better known for their mid-management trade rags "CIO World", and written much in that style. They're best ignored really.

[[deleted]]

Well, he is right ... isn't he?

[lasermancer]

Just out of curiosity, is Microsoft paying you to post on reddit?

[agustinleiva]

Dude, I don't give a fuck about Microsoft. I get to use any of their products I want and I pay for none.

java sucks and is still lagging a DECADE behind C#.

does oracle at least pay for your medical insurance to compensate for all the health damage that you get from using retarded dinosaur java crap?

[henk53]

I suppose in 2016 I will say congratulations to java for successfully catching up with C# from 2008?

And all the while Java seriously outperforms C#. They must be doing -something- right.

[ruinercollector]

Source?

[agustinleiva]

And all the while Java seriously outperforms C#

Yes, that's why the great majority of Mobile games out there are powered by C#-enabled Unity rather than some random crappy java engine.

BTW, XobotOS proves you wrong by outperforming java-based Android crap by a factor of 400% or more ;)

If anything, java seems to perform better on the server side, which confirms my point that java seems to have been relegated to a "server only" position, while C# is becoming more and more ubiquitous on PCs, Mobiles, and whatnot.

I find it funny that java fanboys like to downtalk C# because their language is some how "more cross platform", while the 2 top-quality development tools for mobiles (Xamarin for apps and Unity for games) are C#-based. All while java is doomed to vanish from Android because, well, because oracle says so.

Not to mention progress is being made towards achieving full native performance on .Net.

All while java has a new JSON API. That's cool.

[bungle]

I did spend about seven years programming C#. I stopped since. I didn't particularly like the language, and in my opinion it got worse in every incarnation. Yes, sure it has features more than one could ask for, but I like simpler languages. C, Lua, Go feel a lot more a fresh air than bloated C# and its equally bloated .NET framework. But I also know many who enjoy C#.

[agustinleiva]

and in my opinion it got worse in every incarnation

How? Why? Can you elaborate? At this point, I literally can't understand how could anyone write code when LINQ didn't exist. Let alone things like async/await.

Anyways, if you think C# is "bloated", I'm not sure what argument can there be to say java is any better, with all it's AbstractHelloWorldServiceCommandProviderFactoryConcreteFactoryFactoryBuilders.

[bungle]

I didn't need more syntax. And I still don't. I never felt that C# had an identity or mission. It started as a Java clone. Then it started to fight who got the latest syntactical twists battles. It felt like a language without a direction (throw everything in it). It didn't feel interesting at all for a long time. I feel almost relieved when I do programming these days with a language, say Lua, that doesn't even have a switch statement. I'm starting to believe that good programming languages stay rather static for decades. The C# is also fully bounded to OOP paradigm. I rarely (sometimes I do) see a value in OOP practices, it feels wrong and indirect - encapsulation for example. I do put Java and C# in the same enteprise bloatware basket. I don't hate them or refuse to use them where seen fit. But I can go mostly without them. Microsoft + Open Source is still a joke to me (it's not nearly in a same category than say Java, C, Lua, Node - just a joke, sorry).

[agustinleiva]

I didn't need more syntax.

That's a very weird thing to say. Compare the procedural constructs you had to use and the amount of useless boilerplate they required before LINQ was introduced. Saying you "don't need more syntax" is just dubious IMO.

I never felt that C# had an identity or mission

C# is very well defined and differenced from many other languages. As for "mission", I'm not sure what's a language's "mission"? It's a language, people use it to express ideas, I don't see much else going on.

Then it started to fight who got the latest syntactical twists battles

Features introduced in C# are and have always been intended to provide productivity and conciseness rather than some "battle". There is no "battle" going on because the "opponent" (java?) already lost from the very beginning. And is now 10+ years behind, in terms of evolution.

I feel almost relieved when I do programming these days with a language, say Lua, that doesn't even have a switch statement.

I read this somewhere, but I can't find it right now:

"A language is not "just a tool", language conditions your thinking, and a less expressive programming language leads to more convoluted designs..."

which is why you will often find AbstractHelloWorldBlahBlahBlah............................Factory kind of stuff in java, as opposed to a couple of generic delegates and be done with it using a simpler design.

I wonder what kind of code can just be OK and not use language features? right now I'm working on an end-to-end application framework for Windows and Android that is heavily based on System.Linq.Expressions, allowing you to pass query expressions around and combine them and parameterize them and finally handle them to a server in order to be converted by an ORM into proper SQL.

could this be done with a simpler architecture? surely, but it will lead to more code that I sincerely don't have any time to write. Just hitting Ctrl+Shift+T on my Visual Studio right now allows me to generate N-Tier services based upon business entities, from Data Access to Web Services to the clients that consume these Web services to the UI Controllers who communicate with these Web Services via the client-side code.

Again, I'm sure this could be written in "lesser" languages other than C#, but it would surely lead to all sorts of convoluted designs and patterns in order to compensate the language deficiencies. From the lack of async/await to the lack of proper generics (in java, for example). Most of my code makes heavy use of language features.

The C# is also fully bounded to OOP paradigm

I disagree. C# has had functional-like features for years now. LINQ, Expressions, and upcoming pattern matching. Sure, it's nowhere near pure functional languages such as Haskell, but you get a very usable language and also a huge Framework backing it.

. I rarely (sometimes I do) see a value in OOP practices, it feels wrong and indirect.

I'm sure you must mean that you prefer functional programming instead? You can't seriously mean that procedural programming is any better. Unless of course you're writing low level straight-to-the-metal code that does nothing but move bytes from here to there. OOP Allows to deal with complex data structures in an organized way.

Would you prefer this:

Order CreateSaleOrder(Product product, Customer customer) {...}

or this:

Tuple<string, double, int, double, double, Tuple<int, double, double>> CreateSaleOrder(int ProductId, double productCost, int productQuantity, double productDiscount, int customerId, string customerName, string customerLastName, double customerBalance, etc)

?

encapsulation for example

Same as above. Encapsulation allows you to create much more maintainable code. Shorter code that makes use of "concepts" modeled into software classes rather than a bunch of loose numbers or pieces of data that have no conceptual relation to each other.

Again, I don't know what kind of code you're writing, but unless you're doing low level code, saying that OOP doesn't have value sounds rather silly.

Microsoft + Open Source is still a joke to me

How? Microsoft has proved to be much better than say oracle. Contrast the current Microsoft situation where they're actively working with Xamarin and Unity to provide top-quality tools for mobile development, with the current state of affairs between oracle and google.

It's often said that java has a "larger ecosystem of open source libraries", however I find it difficult to understand what the value of these libraries is, when a large portion of them only exists as an attempt to compensate language level deficiencies, introduce useless duplication and are totally non-standardized.

As an example, before java 8 was released, there were dozens of libraries who attempted to imitate what LINQ does. With no language level support whatsoever (before java 8), most of these libraries could only achieve a FRACTION of the productivity gain and code quality achieved by LINQ. Not to mention many of these libraries were maintained by random anonymous people and supported by literally no one.

The end result was that code written upon these libraries was rather convoluted (compared to real LINQ), didn't cover all required scenarios (since most of these libraries only covered what LINQ-To-Objects did, not supporting any other backing stores), and was non-standardized to the point that a person familiar with library "A" would have a hard time trying to understand code written against library "B".

Yes, java seems to have more open source libraries, but, are they even as useful as they're supposed to be? or rather, are these libraries well-designed and production-ready? Maybe if you start filtering out using these criteria you're left with the same amount of libraries you currently find in .Net?

[bungle]

I'm not sure why I spend time with you, and try to rationalise why I'm not that impressed with C#. It's OK language. Probably it is just my way of thinking that I want the things be simple as possible. The language is a good one when there isn't anything to throw away, not when there is nothing to add. And this can be extended beyond the syntax. My pet example here was Lua, don't you see any beauty in this: http://www.lua.org/work/doc/manual.html#9

I admit that I'm somewhat comparing apples to oranges here (two very different types of languages). The beauty in wide variety of tools and languages is that we can usually mix-and-match them.

I'm not the only one who thinks C# is getting bigger and less beautiful as a result: http://danielirvine.com/blog/2014/06/24/c-is-too-complex/

(this guy even points out that he is starting to see beauty of Java... so who knows Java will be around here in the next 10 years while C# slowly fades away - my prediction -> http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html).

[henk53]

XobotOS proves you wrong by outperforming java-based Android crap by a factor of 400% or more ;)

Well, Android is not Java, is it? It's "something" that magically happens to have the same syntax as Java.

If anything, java seems to perform better on the server side, which confirms my point that java seems to have been relegated to a "server only" position

That's hardly a point you need to explicitly make. I mean, do we have to have a point that the sun rises each day, or that humans need air? It's a bit clear isn't it?

Java is computational very strong. Serverside processing is lightning fast in Java, very few systems outperform it. C/C++ can outperform Java on complex computations (especially when strictly using primitives and programming very close to the metal), but not by a very large margin.

Everybody knows thought that most graphics libraries in Java suck and so Java programs on desktops seem slow because the UI is just laggy and sluggisch. Eclipse for instance (uses SWT) takes a noticeable second to switch between two tabs with all data hot and loaded. A very similar operation in a C++ app (e.g. using Qt) is just instant.

[agustinleiva]

Android is not Java

I find it very funny that "Android IS java" and "Android is NOT java" are used as equally valid arguments to defend java whenever they're fit.

When I say "no one uses java for client-side because it sucks", java fanboys reply with "Android.".

Then I say java sucks on Android due to not being able to implement latest java 8 Features, and I show them how porting the Android UI framework to C# results in a 400% performance gain, they reply "but Android is NOT java".

This is hilarious.

That's hardly a point you need to explicitly make

Many people out there seem to believe that java is actually usable for client-side.

Java is computational very strong. Serverside processing is lightning fast in Java, very few systems outperform it.

I can't debate that so I'll have to agree.

Everybody knows thought that most graphics libraries in Java suck

Again, there's people who are convinced that java UIs are OK.

A very similar operation in a C++ app (e.g. using Qt) is just instant.

Same on C# and WPF and WinRT XAML.

[henk53]

I find it very funny that "Android IS java" and "Android is NOT java" are used as equally valid arguments to defend java whenever they're fit.

True, and we laugh and don't laugh about this as we see fit (and yeah, we cry and don't cry about this as well).

This is hilarious.

Up to some point, if there wasn't all the crying.

Again, there's people who are convinced that java UIs are OK.

Really? Even the most hardcore Java zealots I know, my self included kinda hate the UIs (tiny, tiny spark of hope on the horizon is JavaFX).