Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Apr 2012 19:17 UTC, submitted by bowkota
Legal Java creator James Gosling: "Just because Sun didn't have patent suits in our genetic code doesn't mean we didn't feel wronged. While I have differences with Oracle, in this case they are in the right. Google totally slimed Sun. We were all really disturbed, even Jonathan: he just decided to put on a happy face and tried to turn lemons into lemonade, which annoyed a lot of folks at Sun." Ouch. Also, doesn't jive with Schwartz' comments - might be illustrative of how bad things really were at the once great Sun.
Thread beginning with comment 516377
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
C++ forever
by kwan_e on Mon 30th Apr 2012 19:45 UTC
kwan_e
Member since:
2007-02-18

I hope this legal uncertainty just kills off Java for good.

Java is a pile of crap that encourages more piles of crap to be written. I hold Java directly responsible for Eclipse and OSGi, and thus the piles of crap that they also induce.

Reply Score: 17

RE: C++ forever
by WorknMan on Mon 30th Apr 2012 20:07 in reply to "C++ forever"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

I hope this legal uncertainty just kills off Java for good.

Java is a pile of crap that encourages more piles of crap to be written. I hold Java directly responsible for Eclipse and OSGi, and thus the piles of crap that they also induce.


You'll probably get modded down for that comment, but you'll get no arguments from me ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: C++ forever
by tylerdurden on Mon 30th Apr 2012 20:50 in reply to "C++ forever"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

I take the main problem you have with Java, if C++ is your ideal, it is that it does not suck enough.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: C++ forever
by kwan_e on Mon 30th Apr 2012 22:59 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

I take the main problem you have with Java, if C++ is your ideal, it is that it does not suck enough.


C++ is a much better language than Java, especially with the improvements and simplifications, like the auto keyword for type deduction, or the automatic memory management of shared pointers and move semantics, of C++11.

People who dislike C++ do not understand how to use C++ properly and should under no circumstances be allowed near important code.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: C++ forever
by MollyC on Tue 1st May 2012 17:45 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
MollyC Member since:
2006-07-04

C++ used to "suck" (in relative terms, but not in absolute terms, IMO), but modern C++ I think is my favorite language right now (unless I want to do something in a more natural "functional" style, in which case I'll go for F# (or lisp/scheme, if I'm in an old-school mood)).

I started with C++, moved on to Java at one point, then moved to C# (which began as a cleaner version of Java, then moved well beyond it while remaining cleaner), and i've liked both, but I'm back to C++ now.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: C++ forever
by bnolsen on Mon 30th Apr 2012 21:09 in reply to "C++ forever"
bnolsen Member since:
2006-01-06

I also won't argue about java. But I would have to say that its level of adoption in part brought about its mediocrity.

c++? It's all I use, but no way would I say it's the best language out there. Its amazing how it's stayed relevant for decades and is still modern. And all these new languages that are supposed to be c++ killers...i haven't been impressed.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[2]: C++ forever
by kwan_e on Mon 30th Apr 2012 23:12 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

I also won't argue about java. But I would have to say that its level of adoption in part brought about its mediocrity.


Actually, looking back at what it used to be, it was also pretty crap to begin with. After that it was mostly about patching up oversights.

c++? It's all I use, but no way would I say it's the best language out there. Its amazing how it's stayed relevant for decades and is still modern. And all these new languages that are supposed to be c++ killers...i haven't been impressed.


I don't think even Bjarne Stroustrup would go so far as to say that C++ is the best language, otherwise he would never be involved with efforts to improve the language.

The best thing about C++ is that it wasn't designed with a programming style in mind. You aren't stuck with just one of OO, or functional, or procedural.

If there's one thing I hate about Java is that it encourages the use of inheritance everywhere.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: C++ forever
by moondevil on Mon 30th Apr 2012 22:02 in reply to "C++ forever"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

It would help, if many self proclaimed programmers would stay away from keyboards.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: C++ forever
by pooo on Mon 30th Apr 2012 22:12 in reply to "C++ forever"
pooo Member since:
2006-04-22

Java sucks? Yes
C++ forever (for modern application development)? WTF are you smoking?

Seriously there is one language that has, on it's own, nurtured an explosion of great apps in the last couple years: *Javascript* + HTML + CSS3.

Please can someone realize this for a desktop environment so we can move forward at a pace that isn't bound by 1990's languages and technology (gnome3 sort of except not sucky like gnome3 and not with gtk)

For mobile development it is just a matter of time. With chrome for android 4, there is now hardware acceleration for css transforms and mobile apps will feel as buttery smooth as native. Plus app development time will literally be 1/2 developing in Java. The webkit widget for ios is sadly crippled but also getting better.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[2]: C++ forever
by Neolander on Mon 30th Apr 2012 22:47 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

You should give Qt5 a try. The guys behind it seem to think a bit like you. Swapping C++ for Javascript as the preferred language for small software, hoping that GPU acceleration will compensate the performance hit...

Myself, I really don't think that web techs will ever be capable of powering heavy-duty software like After Effects, Logic, or a serious video game. But hey, who knows...

Edited 2012-04-30 22:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: C++ forever
by kwan_e on Mon 30th Apr 2012 23:17 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

Java sucks? Yes
C++ forever (for modern application development)? WTF are you smoking?


The problem that faces C++ is lack of standardization of GUI stuff. However, with toolkits like Qt, which is an example of beautiful C++, it is a non-issue for the three major platforms.

Seriously there is one language that has, on it's own, nurtured an explosion of great apps in the last couple years: *Javascript* + HTML + CSS3.


So... who writes those Javascript, HTML and CSS3 interpreters and what language do THEY (ie, people more important than you) use?

Please can someone realize this for a desktop environment so we can move forward at a pace that isn't bound by 1990's languages and technology (gnome3 sort of except not sucky like gnome3 and not with gtk)


GTK is an attempt to make C more like C++ when C++ would have been a better choice to start with.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: C++ forever
by shmerl on Tue 1st May 2012 00:20 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

C++ forever indeed. Hyped stuff will find it's niche, but C++ isn't going away for high performance applications. You don't seriously consider using JavaScript for them?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: C++ forever
by Beta on Tue 1st May 2012 00:52 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
Beta Member since:
2005-07-06

Seriously there is one language that has, on it's own, nurtured an explosion of great apps in the last couple years: *Javascript* + HTML + CSS3.

If Java can be a pile of crap that encourages more piles of crap, wth is Javascript on that spectrum.
It is still a few years from being anywhere decent enough to write full blown apps that don’t churn and cycle‐collect through the user experience.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: C++ forever
by phoehne on Mon 30th Apr 2012 23:35 in reply to "C++ forever"
phoehne Member since:
2006-08-26

Java if you want an over-engineered solutions that takes a gig of ram and 1 second of wall-clock time to print 'hello world.' C++ if you want to crash and burn, while you spend all day hunting the f**king memory issue that core dumps almost randomly! Ada Forever!!!!

AND YES - I AM ONLY JOKING.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: C++ forever
by kwan_e on Mon 30th Apr 2012 23:51 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

C++ if you want to crash and burn, while you spend all day hunting the f**king memory issue that core dumps almost randomly!


You're using it wrong.

During my university years, somehow I became interested in language and compiler design. Didn't have much of a preference for any language, except for my "me too!" bias for Java's garbage collection. Then for my final year project, to be written in C++ by four people, I made the decision to liberally use the STL and Boost right off the bat. I am proud to say that there were absolutely no memory related problems. From then on, I understood how C++ could be used in a good way.

Now, my job consists of writing Java to implement Eclipse plugins. The issue with them is that they force you to write bad designs.

It is a good judge of a programmer's skill and worth to see if they hate C++ because of implementation issues, or if they hate Java because of design issues. If you're still stuck hating memory management, go back to university - the big boys are worried about design.

Ada Forever!!!!

AND YES - I AM ONLY JOKING.


Actually, I like large parts of Ada as well. Especially how you can specify exactly how you want records laid out in memory. Or how you can specify ranges. And of course the built in concurrency.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: C++ forever
by Soulbender on Tue 1st May 2012 04:12 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Java if you want an over-engineered solutions that takes a gig of ram and 1 second of wall-clock time to print 'hello world


Well, while it may not be the fault of the language itself, that is exactly my impression of most Java apps. Hilariously over-engineered, fantastically under-performing and unnecessarily complex.
Maybe the attraction of Java is that it allows shitty programmers to create job security...uhm..I mean "enterprise-grade applications".

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: C++ forever
by renox on Mon 30th Apr 2012 23:37 in reply to "C++ forever"
renox Member since:
2005-07-06

I hope this legal uncertainty just kills off Java for good.


If the judge decides that APIs can be copyrighted, it won't kill just Java, it'll create a huge mess everywhere.

As for the patents, I don't know what exactly is the situation here, but those who use the GPLv2 implementation may be safe (due to the implicit patent grant but it's not tested in court so not sure).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: C++ forever
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 1st May 2012 16:40 in reply to "C++ forever"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

The funny thing is that Eclipse is one of the best Desktop Java apps. Which, not coincidently, was not written by Sun and didn't use any Sun created GUI toolkits. And it still kind of sucks ( depending on your use case).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: C++ forever
by kwan_e on Tue 1st May 2012 20:13 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

The funny thing is that Eclipse is one of the best Desktop Java apps. Which, not coincidently, was not written by Sun and didn't use any Sun created GUI toolkits. And it still kind of sucks ( depending on your use case).


I use Eclipse (and derivatives) all the time and I absolutely don't find it a good Java program at all, let alone best, even on a Windows 7 64-bit quad core laptop. If emacs is a crappy OS emulator lacking a decent editor, then Eclipse is a good OS lacking a decent computer processor. Yes, I'd never thought it would be possible to describe something as such until now.

And let's not go into the design freakshow that is it's platform plug-in architecture, for anyone that's had to write a plug-in.

Edited 2012-05-01 20:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: C++ forever
by Kebabbert on Wed 2nd May 2012 08:40 in reply to "C++ forever"
Kebabbert Member since:
2007-07-27

I hope this legal uncertainty just kills off Java for good.

Java is a pile of crap that encourages more piles of crap to be written. I hold Java directly responsible for Eclipse and OSGi, and thus the piles of crap that they also induce.

In theory, Java can have higher performance than C++, because Java recompiles the binary code and optimizes every run. C++ compiles and optimizes just once. That is the reason adaptive compilers are faster in theory.

Now we wait a bit, until the Java designers catch up with theory. Guess what, the fastest and largest stock exchanges in the world are built in Java. Not C++. For instance, NASDAQ stock exchange is programmed in Java, and it has sub 100 microseconds latency, and throughput in million of orders per second.

The London Stock Exchange is built using C++ on Linux/Solaris, and LSE get 100 microseconds latency.

So, you might think that Java is crap, but it has world class leading performance, surpassing C++. And in the future, Java will surpass C++ because Java optimizes for every run.

Besides, Java is the most used language out there. And it is way simpler than C++. C++ is slower and bloated.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: C++ forever
by kwan_e on Wed 2nd May 2012 10:22 in reply to "RE: C++ forever"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

In theory, Java can have higher performance than C++, because Java recompiles the binary code and optimizes every run. C++ compiles and optimizes just once. That is the reason adaptive compilers are faster in theory.


Because, as we all know, C++, being a compiled language, can never ever ever be written to compile into bytecode to be JITed at a later stage. That is why, due to your argument, the whole LLVM project ceases to exist from this very moment!

Furthermore, let's all conflate a programming language with its implementation(s). That is why the C++ standard demands that C++ can only ever be compiled directly to native machine code. That is why, due to your argument, I suddenly have a massive brain hemorrhage, causing me to forget everything I've read in the C++ standard and articles available elsewhere!

Now we wait a bit, until the Java designers catch up with theory. Guess what, the fastest and largest stock exchanges in the world are built in Java. Not C++. For instance, NASDAQ stock exchange is programmed in Java, and it has sub 100 microseconds latency, and throughput in million of orders per second.

The London Stock Exchange is built using C++ on Linux/Solaris, and LSE get 100 microseconds latency.


What a completely scientific comparison. Because, as we all know, NASDAQ and LSE run the exact same hardware and middleware and the volume of data they receive is exactly the same. Not to mention that their management is also exactly the same, with exactly the same amount of money being spent on the hardware infrastructure at the exact same time. Not to mention that we are absolutely sure that the NASDAQ is written in 100% Java with no JNI or processing being distributed to compiled language subprocessors. By that same token, we thus know absolutely that LSE is written in 100% C++ with no processing being distributed to subprocessors written in Java or Python etc.

I'm glad we have two people defending Java so scientifically.

So, you might think that Java is crap, but it has world class leading performance, surpassing C++. And in the future, Java will surpass C++ because Java optimizes for every run.


Because, as you've so elegantly demonstrated above, C++ can only ever be compiled to machine code. In fact, Bjarne Stroustrup himself has threatened to break the knee caps of all the LLVM developers.

Let's also conveniently forget the fact that there exists other languages that aren't Java but can be compiled to run in the JVM, and thus conveniently fail to realize that you're actually arguing about JVM vs C++, which is not the same as Java vs C++.

Besides, Java is the most used language out there.


Another gem of an argument from those who persist to not understand logic. Repeat after me:

popular != better;

That statement, I think, should compile in both C++ and Java, and perform optimally well.

And it is way simpler than C++. C++ is slower and bloated.


Have you seen Java 7?

C++ is slower and bloated only when compared the a Java program that's been running for a while. Not to mention the logical fallacies you made above. Hardly a fair (or logical) comparison when you compare a language with a JVM.

I won't stop you comparing implementations of languages. You haven't actually argued anything that compares the languages themselves.

-----------------------------------------------

Can I get someone who actually has a good grasp of logic, language design, engineering and the current and developing state of technology regarding language backends?

Reply Parent Score: 2