[Orange™]

I put yes only because most sites i go on need it.

[Chozo4]

Yes being that an online MMORPG I play is based off the JAVA-Platform. Using the latest Microsoft JVM instead of SUN however.

If you also mean JavaSCRIPT then definately yes as I actively use it in my web-based projects. Heavily used to cut down bandwidth use between server->client transfers, manipulate\send data, and recieve data using an emulated form of AJAX to collect data dynamically in the form of Javascript instead of XML.

This post has been edited by Chozo4: 24 July 2006 - 12:38 AM

[Mangix]

lol. RuneScape sucks and also JavaScript is waaaaaaay diffrent than Java. the two have no relation(except for the name)

anyways, Java is crap. there are no good programs that use it(except Eclipse dammit) and as a lot of people have said, Resource Hog. really uneeded.

[CoffeeFiend]

Too much people are confusing java and javacript indeed, which are totally different even though they sound alike.

Javascript is what your web browser executes (inside web pages). That's NOT java (so anyone who said they like it based on that...)

Java is a programming language. It DOESN'T run in a web page / web browser or such. Ok, there *are* applets (like pjirc and what not), but most people don't want to run those (and are usually a bit freaked out because they're not signed as no one wants to pay for the certificates), also because it takes a while for the browser's java plugin to start, jvm and all (can be quite slow on older PCs), also because people have a problem executing/trusting anybody's code on a web page, people complaining they got to download a 20mb+ JVM to "view a web page"... (people tend to prefer dhtml/ajax/flash stuff to applets generally speaking)

As for liking java or not... Yes and no? It has its uses, but it's not the one and only solution either. Besides, what does the question really ask? Do you (dis)like java... the language itself? the jvm's startup times? on the desktop or server side? the license? ... This question is far too broad to be answered by just yes or no. There's points to like (some mentionned later in post), and others that aren't so great (the XML overdose, some widget toolkits, jvm initial load times)...

It can be cross-platform, but the whole "write once run everywhere" thing like some mentionned is patently false. It's more like "write once, debug everywhere". Some apps need a certain version of a jvm to work properly, in many cases, they almost have to write a version of the app for every jvm (j2me for every phone seems to differ), some PCs have what I'd call "defective" jvms (MS'), etc.

It's a pretty good language with a decent set of features (garbage collection, generics, threads, etc etc), has good and stable/mature frameworks, it has some good dev tools (eclipse like mentionned before, but also intellij, and Sun's now-free products to name a few more), scales well, the JIT is always getting better (hotspot is quite good), there's a bunch of app servers (including free ones and big behemoths), it has good support, it has good performance (excluding initial jvm startup time), it's widely known, ...

Native/unmanaged code is preferred by some, but it takes FAR more time to develop that way for many apps, resulting directly in longer dev times and unreasonable costs. I'm all for managed/garbage collected languages. And as for the RAM usage of these, RAM is dirt cheap nowadays. 1GB (2x512) of Crucial Rendition DDR2 is like 80$USD currently, while the average programmer earns like 40$/hr+ (add administrative overhead, benefits and all so almost double the rate).

Anyhow. I'm definitely a C# person (.Net 2.0 rocks!)

[Mangix]

What About .net 3.0

[CoffeeFiend]

Mangix, on Jul 24 2006, 04:03 PM, said:

What About .net 3.0

Quite honestly, I haven't had much time to play with all the new Vista stuff much. .Net 2.0 is still very recent (lots of people haven't made the switch yet or just have now), and what ".Net 3.0" brings isn't so much language changes, but is rather a set of additions on top of the existing v2.0:

-WPF (Windows Presentation Foundation a.k.a. Avalon), for creating the new UIs using XAML and all;
-WCF (Windows Communication Foundation a.k.a. Indigo), for communication (think web services, WSE, MSMQ messenging, remoting, etc). That's the part I'm really looking forward to!
-WWF (Windows Workflow Foundation - not related to wrestling in any way...), a workflow engine (which is getting to be a necessity in many enterprise apps nowadays)
-WCS (Windows CardSpace a.k.a. infocard), for identities - haven't looked at it much but it looks decent/useful.

Yes, the 3.0 name is confusing, as the language is unchanged, and there is no new framework, just new stuff on top of the existing one...

The bad part? We just went thru a .Net 2.0 change (new stuff to learn), a new version of SQL Server (2005) - more changes (not just minor things) and things to learn, new version of Visual Studio (2005 too) and a whole bunch of other new stuff. Now, we'll only have to learn ALL of Vista (and the new admin stuff/imaging & unattended install stuff and all), and all of these brand new technologies (WPF/WCF/WWF/WCS) that goes with it too... That's a LOT of new things to learn again! And that's not considering that we're (I am at least) learning a lot more things on the side, be it from things like TechEd, PDC and MIX, or from having to port some app to another database (DB2/oracle/postgresql/firebird/sqlite/etc) hence learn that one too, having to learn new frameworks and libs (VSTO, Enterprise Library, log4net, Atlas or whatever the case may be) or ORMs and codegens (LLBLGen, CodeSmith, NHibernate, MyGeneration/d00dads, etc) or having to get overly familiar with some new apps of diverse complexity (DotNetNuke, CommunityServer, BizTalk, CRM, ...), and that's not counting time to look at some of the new overhyped stuff (AJAX, RoR, etc), nor getting better at things like patterns, architecture and all... Or domain specific knowledge. I like learning new stuff, but at one point, it's just TOO [censored] MUCH. </rant>

[At0mic]

"Do you like Java?" is a question only a Java programmer should be able to answer. Those of us who don't program in java, only get to see the finished program and whether or not it loads quickly. This is no basis for assessing whether or not a programming language is any good.

I'm currently learning PHP and I would say that PHP is a very good language. Before I started learning PHP however, it would have been very very unfair to assess whether or not its a good programming language - regardless of how many PHP pages I had seen.

I've seen a lot of Java programs. Some I like, some I don't. However, I don't know the language so its impossible for me to say if its a good language or not.

In the same way, I think that nlite is a seriously good program and so do many other people. If I thought a load of other .net programs were very good as well, thats still no basis for saying .net it a good language. .net could be the worst programming language in the world for all I know. All I see is the finished programs.

I get the impression that a lot of people have tried a lot of Java programs that they don't like and using that as a basis for jugging the Java programming language itself.

[n7Epsilon]

I write in C# and know about the .NET Framework.

I have to say .NET makes it a lot easier to write programs. While it can be slow, a properly optimized and GAC'd .NET program can run as fast as a native program.

And with utilities like FxCop, writing good .NET applications is easy to learn and .NET can be made portable with Mono.

Also .NET doesn't have as much an overhead as Java IMO and it makes it easy to write secure code.

The only disadvantage I can think of .NET is requiring a 23 MB runtime (but that will be standard in Vista onwards I think) and that we can't write low-level kernel mode stuff with it.

[CoffeeFiend]

At0mic, on Jul 24 2006, 05:48 PM, said:

I'm currently learning PHP and I would say that PHP is a very good language.

I can only strongly disagree on this one. PHP is perhaps the worst language I've ever seen (not mentionning things like GWBasic or the like). God awful is more like it.

A few links that explain my thoughts:

http://tnx.nl/php
http://maurus.net/work/php-sucks/
http://www.bitstorm.org/edwin/en/php/
http://plasmasturm.org/log/393/
http://spyced.blogsp...-php-sucks.html
http://minutillo.com/steve/weblog/2004/6/1...e-and-data-loss
http://lumphammer.ne.../phpannoyances/
http://keithdevens.c...Aug/13/HATE-PHP
http://keithdevens.c...ov/24/PHP-sucks
http://www.ukuug.org/events/linux2002/pape.../php/index.html
http://rc3.org/2006/02/php_is_bad.php

PHP seems good if that's all you've ever seen or such. Actually, to be honest, I would say it's better than classic ASP, but again, what isn't? It's not exactly something you brag about.

The whole thing sucks thoroughly. It's not compiled, it's ridiculously inconsistent, unicode support is non-existant (something that's a basic necessity these days) - a step back from perl, laughable DB interfaces hacked together with a bunch of half-assed escaping functions when everything else has been using prepared statements/parameterized queries for forever, etc. Most of the PHP stuff out there is fugly. No content/code separation (and often no separation in any of the code), nothing like a proper tiered OO design, it's usually ripe with bugs and vulnerabilities like SQL injection, etc (much like a lot of the classic ASP stuff). And it's usually paired with one of the worst DBs out there (no need to mention the name) using proprietary SQL... One could go on about this for days.

PHP is basically the only language I refuse to work in nowadays (there's enough work out there to be minimally "picky").

[ripken204]

crahak, on Jul 24 2006, 04:41 PM, said:

Too much people are confusing java and javacript indeed, which are totally different even though they sound alike.

Javascript is what your web browser executes (inside web pages). That's NOT java (so anyone who said they like it based on that...)

Java is a programming language. It DOESN'T run in a web page / web browser or such. Ok, there *are* applets (like pjirc and what not), but most people don't want to run those (and are usually a bit freaked out because they're not signed as no one wants to pay for the certificates), also because it takes a while for the browser's java plugin to start, jvm and all (can be quite slow on older PCs), also because people have a problem executing/trusting anybody's code on a web page, people complaining they got to download a 20mb+ JVM to "view a web page"... (people tend to prefer dhtml/ajax/flash stuff to applets generally speaking)

As for liking java or not... Yes and no? It has its uses, but it's not the one and only solution either. Besides, what does the question really ask? Do you (dis)like java... the language itself? the jvm's startup times? on the desktop or server side? the license? ... This question is far too broad to be answered by just yes or no. There's points to like (some mentionned later in post), and others that aren't so great (the XML overdose, some widget toolkits, jvm initial load times)...

It can be cross-platform, but the whole "write once run everywhere" thing like some mentionned is patently false. It's more like "write once, debug everywhere". Some apps need a certain version of a jvm to work properly, in many cases, they almost have to write a version of the app for every jvm (j2me for every phone seems to differ), some PCs have what I'd call "defective" jvms (MS'), etc.

It's a pretty good language with a decent set of features (garbage collection, generics, threads, etc etc), has good and stable/mature frameworks, it has some good dev tools (eclipse like mentionned before, but also intellij, and Sun's now-free products to name a few more), scales well, the JIT is always getting better (hotspot is quite good), there's a bunch of app servers (including free ones and big behemoths), it has good support, it has good performance (excluding initial jvm startup time), it's widely known, ...

Native/unmanaged code is preferred by some, but it takes FAR more time to develop that way for many apps, resulting directly in longer dev times and unreasonable costs. I'm all for managed/garbage collected languages. And as for the RAM usage of these, RAM is dirt cheap nowadays. 1GB (2x512) of Crucial Rendition DDR2 is like 80$USD currently, while the average programmer earns like 40$/hr+ (add administrative overhead, benefits and all so almost double the rate).

Anyhow. I'm definitely a C# person (.Net 2.0 rocks!)

i code both java and javascript. and javascript is the biggest pita since it doesnt tell you the error, if a single mistype is in a huge function, then it will just say that the function has an error. oh wow! that helps me so much! not. on the other hand, java will give you the exact line and value that there is an error on, so nice

[CoffeeFiend]

ripken204, on Jul 24 2006, 06:54 PM, said:

i code both java and javascript. and javascript is the biggest pita since it doesnt tell you the error, if a single mistype is in a huge function, then it will just say that the function has an error. oh wow! that helps me so much! not. on the other hand, java will give you the exact line and value that there is an error on, so nice

I'd agree that JS is more of a PITA. But I'm not sure what you're using to test, there are various browsers and utilities/tools to debug JS, and they do say a LOT more than just "typo in function" or such. There's firefox extensions for that, MS has a free script debugger (also works in IE if you need to), visual studio can also do it - lots of apps really.

Java of course has more powerful tools, it's not a just simple interpreted scripting language. Same holds true with almost anything else... (C, C++, C#, etc)

[ripken204]

maybe ill look for some of those tools. ive just been using IE since i dont rly do much JS.

[nfm]

In my opinion java is better than dot net 2 becasue it uses less resources and can be run on all machines because java runtimes is cross platform. In the end I don't like both, if I had to code any encoder or something that does a lot of calculation I would use an assembly with c/c++, those languages creates fastest apps on the planet. You can write hello world in C# along with other function and it will eat more than 10mb of ram just to run. Create same example in java, it will load faster and use littlebit less memory. Now create in c++ usinf mfc, it will eat about 500kb, pure c++ will eat less and assembly will come up to be fastest and most efficient.

This is why Windows isn't build on dot net it's build form mfc and c++. I also thought C# and dot net were the greatest now to me it's a complete b*lls***.

One that said that php is the worst is wrong, php and javascript are the best when sripting sites etc.

However net 3.0 looks pretty good.

[Chozo4]

--------
php and javascript are the best when sripting sites etc.
--------
I agree to that. Both of them in tandem make for powerful client-server scripting. Both are the similar in structure and functionality. Save one is serverside and the other is clientside.

Had my hand (or two) in using the two together already. Been working on my chat using just javascript and php together. Php to handle backbone functions such as authentication, flatfile database management, and user data handling. Javascript to handle client functions, inputs, and update retrieval.

... Sadly - i'm not helping with keeping this topic on track very much. So.. back to polling

This post has been edited by Chozo4: 24 July 2006 - 07:30 PM

[ripken204]

php and javascript is what i like to do, sp many options.

[CoffeeFiend]

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

In my opinion java is better than dot net 2 becasue it uses less resources

Well, that's a very over-simplified view on the whole thing, and can be false too. It really depends on the particular JVM you're using and such. I doubt you could back up that claim...

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

and can be run on all machines because java runtimes is cross platform.

It's not instantly cross-platform. Not all widget libs have a normal look and feel, and don't always use the OS'es native widgets and such. It's a bit more complicated than that. And .Net apps can be easily ported to Mono to run on any platform, or can be compiled to java bytecode using grasshopper - which will run on every platform where java does... Not quite a tie, but almost.

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

if I had to code any encoder or something that does a lot of calculation I would use an assembly with c/c++, those languages creates fastest apps on the planet.

Again, that's a simplistic view of the whole matter. FAR from all apps do just calculations like that, more like a very small portion. C/C++ isn't the magic and best language to solve all problems either. It may not be possible, reasonable, or practical to solve a particular problem like you mention in C/C++ either. Like I've said before, in most cases, it would cost far more to pay someone to write code this efficient than it would cost buying the extra speed by throwing hardware at it. Programmers ARE expensive, hardware isn't. (Unless you're talking about a HPC cluster solution or such, in which case it might make sense, and even then things aren't automatically written in C/C++ either). You can code fast stuff that way, but it's expensive, takes more time, etc.

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

You can write hello world in C# along with other function and it will eat more than 10mb of ram just to run.

And the problem is? ... At current prices, 10MB is about a whole dollar's worth of RAM to leave it running. And that's taking languages using VMs and such at a huge and unrealistic disadvantage. They load with them a basic set of functions that you're not using, which the other languages don't offer... That's like an apples to oranges comparison. Compare the average app written in both ways, and you'll see the difference between the two shrink (as the other languages load the required libs to get similar features). It's not really representative of anything.

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

Create same example in java, it will load faster and use littlebit less memory.

I disagree yet again. It totally depends of the actual JVM you're using and such. And in most cases, I dare say the C# version will be slightly lighter and faster.

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

Now create in c++ usinf mfc, it will eat about 500kb, pure c++ will eat less and assembly will come up to be fastest and most efficient.

Apples to oranges. MFC sucks, really (quite dated too). What you're not mentionning, is that the app (if it's used to do anything useful - not hello world - a stupid comparison case), will likely load dozens of MBs of data, eat CPU cycles away and such about as bad as the previous 2 apps. As your apps needs features (which are already included in the other languages) you'll start loading more libs, and eating just as much ram too, maybe even more...

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

This is why Windows isn't build on dot net it's build form mfc and c++.

Nobody's ever said that it was built on .Net technology, and there's no reason for that either. Right tools for the right job. However, you're going to need .Net for most of Vista's new shiny features. Good luck trying to get WPF widgets working in MFC and such.

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

I also thought C# and dot net were the greatest now to me it's a complete b*lls***.

Tell that to millions of lines of mission critical server middleware in use everyday. It's a GODSEND. There's simply NO going back. Same goes for Java. If it wasn't for C#, I'd likely be coding Java.

Kamil, on Jul 24 2006, 08:58 PM, said:

One that said that php is the worst is wrong, php and javascript are the best when sripting sites etc.

ROFL. Good one. Pintos are great cars too (ok, there's nothing wrong with javascript really, but PHP... eww, really, really eww - I can't even think of anything worse, seriously)

And then you say .Net 3 looks good, which really is .Net 2, which you're bashing... Not making a whole lot of sense to me.

The only [weak] point you had against .Net or Java you had was higher memory usage for trivial apps. I don't know, but I don't feel overly concerned about firefox eating away 600 to 700mb of RAM on this PC everyday (and VMWare, DBs and IDEs and other apps eating away hundreds more), what's the big deal with a simple app taking 5 megs more of RAM than it could have, especially if it took half as long to code, is more maintainable, cost less and all? That extra RAM usage could have worried me 5years+ ago, but nowadays 10mb is nothing. Pushed to the extreme, we might as well say "let's code it all in hand-optimized win32asm, it's the only efficient thing, everything else sucks". And if you look at some benches, you'll see that Java performance (excluding the jvm startup delay, JIT and such - and same goes for .Net) is quite on par with C++'s, the difference is quite small. And performance can vary greatly no matter what language you use (depending on the perf of libs used, how well architected/profiled/optimized it is, etc).

Using C++/MFC for everything? Bad idea, but when the only tool you got is a hammer, eventually everything starts to look suspiciously like a nail...

[prx984]

im not really crazy about programming languages that require more than 100mb full install. its annoying, although it doesnt slow my computer down, so i guess i can't complaing. but sun java is so slow on older computers. my 366 crawls through it. and plus, it doesn't seem to be too stable, almost every java thing that i have used locks up. especially pogo games. god those are terrible, i right click to open a window and BAM it locks my entire IE up to the point i cant even load another page. so... not for me

it may be a good language for the programmer, but the end user might have a ton of problems o_O

[Omik]

yea !

[MagicAndre1981]

No, I like .NEt 2.0/3.0 with C#