[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Some Comments [was Re: Article for Slashdot]



I apologize in advance for the sarcasm, I've been trying very hard not to reply,
but when I read plain slander, I have to say something about it.

Shlomi Fish wrote:


> I'd like to emphasize some points about the original posting and the various
> replies that were written by other Linux-IL members:

It seems you didn't really *read* what they wrote you. You are still saying the
same things:

> I dare say I did not experience much with the various additions of JDK 1.1,

It's hardly called "experience" then. The development of the JDK 1.0.2 was stopped
because Sun wanted to fix a lot of known problems and programming difficulties.
It's like running a beta version of an OS (or, an unstable kernel) and complaining
it crashes.

> 2. My main theme was not that Java is a bad language for writing applets, small
> and portable GUI applications, and various other "toys". Its inner restrictions
> allow a programmer of such things to implement them quickly, and be quite
> certain that they are bug-free, run nicely everywhere, etc.

You might be interested to know (or maybe not) that I personally wrote large scale
applications, some of which are considered "critical" applications in Java (yes,
that "toy" language designed for applets). You might be even surprised to know that
I'm not the only one. Go to the java newsgroups (or better yet, visit Symantec
Cafe's newsgroup) to see how people are developing very large scale applications,
including Win32 native apps in Java (and if find yourself asking how a java
application can be Win32 native, please stop calling yourself "a java programmer"
and go do a search in yahoo on "java, programming language")

>
>
>
>
>
> My point was however that as the basis and underlying scripting language of an
> OO RDBMS, Java will fail absolutely. I don't think Perl, or any other language
> I encountered, is good for all purposes as-well, but it certainly tops Java on
> this one.
>
>

??
Java is considered a very OO language, and one of it's first uses was as a database
language. In fact, when I studied in the Technion, the Databases course included a
brief introduction to Java (which was only at a beta state at the time, before
release 1.0) so I imagine it was well intended for OO RDBMS.

>
>
>
>
>
> 3. A little emphasis on why I think Java will fail in this case: an OO RDBMS is
> a complex and fully-optimized client-server and scritpable environment that is
> supposed to be state of the art on almost all levels of programming from simple
> algorithmics to artificial intelligence. And naturally there's a _lot_ of data
> and text processing (such as compression, encoding/decoding, packing/unpacking,
> memory allocation, maintaining reference counts, format conversion, caching)
> involved.
>

??? So what? Benchmarks show that Java running under JIT performs as good as C++
(search for Symantec's statistics, and for Microsoft's VJ statistics).
Again, I don't know what your sources are, but I personally know of a fairly big OO
RDBMS project that was written entirely in Java.

> Many newbies think, because of the hype of Sun and many other bodies and
> individuals about it, that Java is the "language of the future"

Ok, so now I'm a newbie..

> and some hot breakthrough in language design. However, It is simply a
> smalltalk-like

> language built around the C++ syntax that everybody are used to and like, with
> a nice GUI, some powerful inherent features, a good (?) class-structure and a
> consistent philosophy.

That's funny, I heard the same thing about Linux vs. Real UNIX..

> Sun has (very wisely in my opinion) decided to push it
> as a good solution for the "toys" I described.

and W-H-E-R-E did you hear that? Sun is pushing it on every single direction it
can. If it were an "applet" solution, the JDK 1.1 wouldn't be doing so well. It
happens that only IE4 and later versions of Netscape Communicator support JDK 1.1.
This means, that if you're an applet developer, you should develop for JDK 1.0.2.
Then why is Sun pushing 1.1 so hard? (www.javasoft.com)

> Perl 5 on the other hand is an almost amazing langauge,

If you want to say good things about Perl, you don't have to put down Java.

> Oracle 8 is not a toy.

Then why is oracle releasing Oracle Applications (a leading ERP system over Oracle
DBs) version 11 in NC format only? (NC meaning Java code).
If it's not a toy, then why are they releasing Java code instead of a C++ compiled
code?
It's probably because of the bug Microsoft-Intel-Sun-Oracle conspiracy to demolish
Perl...

See, unlike you - I do know something about Oracle & Java.


> It is a huge independant system, that is supposed to
> serve a costumer's need for a long time before it breaks down under pressure or
> needs to be upgraded. If the programmers use Java to build it, too much time
> will be spent on:

Well, as I wrote above, Oracle's programmers *did* use Java to build it..

> I was an experienced BASIC,
> C/C++ and perl programmer when I learned Java, and I still had to get used to
> some of its nuances.

Besides you, every experience C/C++ programmer I know, learned Java in less than a
week by looking at examples alone.

nuances? Yeah, like Perl doesn't have its..


>
>
>
>
>
> 4. The someone to blame issue: Oracle is not going to start throwing
> accusations at SGI or sueing it for money if a bug in IRIX causes Oracle for
> IRIX to fail. They just trust SGI to report the bug soon enough, release a
> patch, etc. so Oracle can inform their costumers, or release a patch of their
> own. Likewise, Oracle cannot "blame" Sun or any of the many other JRE vendors
> if their runtime environment break the server, either.
>

Nice psychological evaluation, has nothing to do with anything.


... And it goes on, and on. I'm not going to continue here (thank god, you say..)

p-l-e-a-s-e, lets agree - I won't talk about things I don't know about (I'll just
ask questions) and you don't talk about things you don't know about (and I
especially mean things like "I know all about Java, but I can't write a decent Java
application, it must be Sun's fault")


> BTW, I already sent the editorial to Slashdot's maintainer, only to realize I
> received a lot of commentary overnight.

I don't expect to convince you (I already saw from the previous letters you are not
interesting in listening, only in speaking your mind), I'm sure every have minded
Java programmer will simply ignore this article. We got used to seeing bulshit all
over the Net.


--
-------------------------
Aviram Jenik

"The Only Difference Between Me
And a Madman Is That I Am Not Mad"

G-Tek Technologies LTD.

-------------------------
Today's quote:
It's the good girls who keep diaries; the bad girls never have the time.
                         - Tallulah Bankhead

S/MIME Cryptographic Signature