Re: That Obj-C/Java Req -- Re: Jobs
Re: That Obj-C/Java Req -- Re: Jobs
- Subject: Re: That Obj-C/Java Req -- Re: Jobs
- From: OS X AIBO <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 18:29:42 -0800 (PST)
Ondra,
Sorry to call you out on this but, to paraphrase Webster, prejudice is
an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before
sufficient knowledge. You've only done a few of months of Java
programming which by any account is not sufficient to really embrace a
new language and object kit. Also, it is clear you have adverse
opinions regarding Java. So, despite your statement to the contrary,
you are prejudiced against Java.
This is too bad because your are clearly a bright and passionate
developer who could really flourish within Java -- if given the chance.
I have no delusions that this will sway your opinion one way or the
other, but would you keep the divisive comments to yourself, as they
are not helpful. Thanks.
* * * *
On a positive note, what is helpful is understanding that Apple doesn't
support Java or Cocoa-Java because it wants to be nice to Java geeks.
It supports these technologies because it needs to attract as much
interest in its platform as possible, and it is unlikely this need will
change for years and years.
I don't have any inside information on this, but I find it highly
unlikely that Apple can or will turn away from ObjC or Cocoa-ObjC any
time soon-- certainly not when they keep writing bread-and-butter apps
in Cocoa-ObjC. So I read this rec. as an admission that the bridge can
an should be better, something that most users of the bridge
understand.
So, there is Cocoa-ObjC and there is Cocoa-Java and developers have a
choice, and that is a good thing.
Beside general advocacy of Cocoa-Java, Steve has been pointing out in
other posts the ways in which Cocoa-Java lacks parity with Cocoa-ObjC.
Keeping up this parity is essential to making Cocoa-Java a viable
technology which hopefully prompts more architects & developers to
decide to test the waters with Apple.
Encourage all Cocoa-advocating brethren, regardless of language choice,
because that choice does not come at the expense of the exclusion of
the other.
(This is the correct list for Cocoa-Java issues, as they are 90%+ Cocoa
and maybe only 10% Java. And unless your name is Brad Cox or Bill Joy,
we all could do without the Obj-C vs. Java posts.)
Thanks for reading this far,
--Dan
--- Ondra Cada <email@hidden> wrote:
>
On Sunday, November 17, 2002, at 03:23 , Steve Klingsporn wrote:
>
>
> - Java byte code is much tighter and smaller in size than PPC or
>
x86
>
> machine code.
>
>
Might be, never checked. With the size of resource data of an average
>
>
application, I can't offhand think of a less important trait, though.
>
>
> - You have much better library support in Java, not only from Sun,
>
but
>
> Netscape, IBM, et al.
>
>
Definitely the opposite. Just compare NSString to the Java String
>
crap!
>
>
> - Memory management is much better in Java. In Objective-C and C,
>
you're
>
> leak-prone.
>
>
Definitely the opposite. Refcounting is the only garbage collector
>
which
>
*works* actually in a distributed world. Java's GC is good for
>
tic-tac-toe
>
(whose implementation, that's agreed, it considerably simplifies: who
>
>
needs a tic-tac-toe, though?)
>
>
> - Exceptions prevent you from crashing hard in Java. In
>
Objective-C, you
>
> crash hard.
>
>
In C you crash hard, and it's an *extremely* fair price for, well,
>
for
>
having C.
>
>
In ObjC you have better exceptions than in Java (since they are not
>
stained by the "throws" nonsense).
>
>
> - Networking is much easier in Java than in Objective-C.
>
>
What exactly is "networking"? It depends on libraries, *not* on the
>
language. DO in C is as easy as possible.
>
>
> - You can rapidly develop applications much faster with Java than
>
> Objective-C.
>
>
Definitely the opposite, since Java
>
>
- does not support classes properly (eg. no class methods in
>
interfaces,
>
no this/super in class /Javaspeak static/ methods, etc);
>
- does not have categories (extremely important, for it disables
>
proper OO
>
design *very* often);
>
- can't poseAsClass;
>
- does not have polymorphism (well thanks to NSSelector it does, but
>
it
>
makes for *EXTREMELY* ugly and inconvenient code);
>
- does not support message forwarding;
>
- ...and hence can't properly embed objects;
>
- neither can reasonably implement HOM;
>
...
>
>
And much and much more. Hell, I *wanted* to learn and use Java, and I
>
>
dived into it with a big gusto. Then alas I've bumped into what crap
>
the
>
language is: oops. My strong bias against the rot is not a prejudice
>
-- it
>
is a bitter experience.
>
---
>
Ondra Cada
>
OCSoftware: email@hidden http://www.ocs.cz
>
private email@hidden http://www.ocs.cz/oc
>
_______________________________________________
>
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
>
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
>
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
>
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.