<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Java is Dead! Long Live Python!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/</link>
	<description>Longer than a blog; shorter than a book</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:31:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Elliotte Rusty Harold</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-466335</link>
		<dc:creator>Elliotte Rusty Harold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 12:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-466335</guid>
		<description>Emil,

You still don&#039;t get it. There is no wrapper type. There is no extra overhead. Longs and ints can be implemented with full object semantics without any additional runtime overhead compared to how primitives operate in Java today. Autoboxing as implemented in Java today is way behind the state of the art. Eiffel has been doing this for over a decade. All you need is a smarter compiler and a slightly different language spec. No VM-level changes are required.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Emil,</p>
<p>You still don&#8217;t get it. There is no wrapper type. There is no extra overhead. Longs and ints can be implemented with full object semantics without any additional runtime overhead compared to how primitives operate in Java today. Autoboxing as implemented in Java today is way behind the state of the art. Eiffel has been doing this for over a decade. All you need is a smarter compiler and a slightly different language spec. No VM-level changes are required.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emil Koutanov</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-466319</link>
		<dc:creator>Emil Koutanov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 10:06:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-466319</guid>
		<description>Dear Elliotte Rusty Harold

&gt;There is no reason the code you present cannot be implemented with object types that do not require allocating more than eight bytes per long.
No, no reason, but having all other objects point to this object that is simply a wrapper for an 8 byte long (additional dereference) is rather excessive, wouldn&#039;t you agree. If you think boxed primitives are sufficient, you need to get some experience with signal processing.

&gt;It is precisely Java’s refusal to change the language to support modern constructs and optimizations that killed it.
Wake up. Java is the perhaps the most relied on language in the world. One of the reasons this is so is because Java is not a &quot;dynamic&quot; language - its a language that is built upon solid compile time checking as opposed to Python that is scripting language - nothing more, nothing less. How many critical applications (banking, finance, etc sector) are written in Python.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Elliotte Rusty Harold</p>
<p>&gt;There is no reason the code you present cannot be implemented with object types that do not require allocating more than eight bytes per long.<br />
No, no reason, but having all other objects point to this object that is simply a wrapper for an 8 byte long (additional dereference) is rather excessive, wouldn&#8217;t you agree. If you think boxed primitives are sufficient, you need to get some experience with signal processing.</p>
<p>&gt;It is precisely Java’s refusal to change the language to support modern constructs and optimizations that killed it.<br />
Wake up. Java is the perhaps the most relied on language in the world. One of the reasons this is so is because Java is not a &#8220;dynamic&#8221; language &#8211; its a language that is built upon solid compile time checking as opposed to Python that is scripting language &#8211; nothing more, nothing less. How many critical applications (banking, finance, etc sector) are written in Python.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ansi_c_still_rules</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-463774</link>
		<dc:creator>ansi_c_still_rules</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 03:46:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-463774</guid>
		<description>After java, python and  come and go, C will still be around. And why is that? Simple. Because it&#039;s not a huge, big bloated language. It&#039;s simple and you can&#039;t match the speed. Yeah I know.. some of you weird java nuts still will claim that java beats C++ or even pure C. fact: A hand-tuned machine lang. program still can&#039;t be beat. And a highly optimized and tightened C or even C++ program is as close as you&#039;re going to get to that and still runs circles around the best written java programs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After java, python and  come and go, C will still be around. And why is that? Simple. Because it&#8217;s not a huge, big bloated language. It&#8217;s simple and you can&#8217;t match the speed. Yeah I know.. some of you weird java nuts still will claim that java beats C++ or even pure C. fact: A hand-tuned machine lang. program still can&#8217;t be beat. And a highly optimized and tightened C or even C++ program is as close as you&#8217;re going to get to that and still runs circles around the best written java programs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Young FOOL!</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-462282</link>
		<dc:creator>Young FOOL!</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:29:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-462282</guid>
		<description>WEEERY long post there Obj P, alltho i am guilty of the young ppl problem,
I LOVE PYTHON REALLY! but i never get superbe applications out of it NEVER!

Its perfect for nice @home tasks ie smal physics graphs.

I tryed java but i tink that it is quite hard ecspecially all interfaces and inheretance moments.
Alltho i tink this Author is a nutcase: java is dead now that is indirect advertiseing.

Only major problem i have with Python is that to to most useful tings i need to get that extend this and so on and yes my java programs works mutch better than my pythons, but dont get me wrong i love my snakes!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WEEERY long post there Obj P, alltho i am guilty of the young ppl problem,<br />
I LOVE PYTHON REALLY! but i never get superbe applications out of it NEVER!</p>
<p>Its perfect for nice @home tasks ie smal physics graphs.</p>
<p>I tryed java but i tink that it is quite hard ecspecially all interfaces and inheretance moments.<br />
Alltho i tink this Author is a nutcase: java is dead now that is indirect advertiseing.</p>
<p>Only major problem i have with Python is that to to most useful tings i need to get that extend this and so on and yes my java programs works mutch better than my pythons, but dont get me wrong i love my snakes!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Objective P is like a neutron.</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-462281</link>
		<dc:creator>Objective P is like a neutron.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:17:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-462281</guid>
		<description>“&quot;&quot;&quot;Woops instead of hireing a programmer for a hire salary that would give us a direct working emedded java like system for a total cost of $xxx the total cost now with all fixes is $xxxxx.&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot;

Woops let me clarify it should be higer not hire

And when i mean back in the old days i mean the pepole that programmed in that time period not ME 

thats a woops.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>“&#8221;"&#8221;Woops instead of hireing a programmer for a hire salary that would give us a direct working emedded java like system for a total cost of $xxx the total cost now with all fixes is $xxxxx.&#8221;"&#8221;"</p>
<p>Woops let me clarify it should be higer not hire</p>
<p>And when i mean back in the old days i mean the pepole that programmed in that time period not ME </p>
<p>thats a woops.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Objective P is like a neutron.</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-462279</link>
		<dc:creator>Objective P is like a neutron.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:10:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-462279</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Whell i dont tink java is dead at all(it is more like a unstable finnacial chart that goes down and then upp like a rocket), still its in use all the time in diffrent companies.

Java aint COBOL(alltho some pepole seems to se it as COBOL when looking at java)

I tink that java could need some cleanups(as many other have stated), but the bottom line is that it works for the present tasks avable today, i tink i just need to say the old but so true phrase &quot;a professional programmer is by widely defenition one who charges pepole/companys for money in exchange for some code&quot; it dossent nessesarelly saying that this programmer is good. infact i dont know any by defenition good python programmer(currently) all again(so called top-notch) python programmers extensevly use fuctions that in the end is (native) so basicaly its uncontrolled C since they ofently dont know exactly what C python will use in the background (maybe its a little arrogant to make this to be just C but in general).

Young pepole especially(i am a young man,i am also an exception to this, i am 20yrs old atm) seem to tend to see java and old languages as &quot;BAD OLD SHIT&quot; becouse it wont produce a pretty game or other tings in a fast and to the eye a clean way. As some has stated Python has its advatages/disadvatages, but in the Real World python or any of these other Candy languages dossent seem to cut it becouse of triveal reasons like MTBF factors witch i think is a big concern that pepole has left out in this discussion/review when it comes to python, yes Java can be Resource consumeing(with a extra ! on the R) but the good advantage is that it IS exceptionally whell working in Real Time applications and in general systems and so on. python however(not saying that python is bad in general) dossent cut it i dont know any programmer that works withtin big coporations or anyting critical that says &quot;you know python works&quot; take mobile phones for example a common ting i hear from the industry is &quot;shit we let some super python programmer do some python code still ist explicitly buggy alltho the programmer is the best you can find for money&quot; then the end of the line is &quot;Woops instead of hireing a programmer for a hire salary that would give us a direct working emedded java like system for a total cost of $xxx the total cost now with all fixes is $xxxxx. i think this resembles alittle of the atitude when ADA arrived, the line is why use C when you could use ADA that was from a practical standpoint undefinable many times better, whell i heard of some old pepole back in those days the old and true saying &quot;it is not a technical problem it is a political problem reffering to the internals of the company&quot; resulting in code that took more time to get working and in the end costed undefinable more $.

As a coclusion i would say that yes Candy languages is prefectly fine when it comes to short lived applications like a homemaid program that runs a calculate once then display fasioned program but its not suited for most programs that is programs who will have a runtime lifespan for hours or so. or applications that will cope with extensive ammounts of third part extensions, embedded devices is an excelet example in that matter.

I recomend Java over python in terms of &quot;lifespan&quot; and &quot;general concistecy&quot;

I recomend Cady lanuages (python and so on) for maybe general personal day use NOT FOR SERIOUS APPLICATIONS(tink resonable here)!

And to all young programmers lets say &lt;30(college educated or not) try out all common languages and get your own opinion in terms of (feel/style and sutch) not in (technical specs becouse most pepole doessent understand the tings under the hood really!, that icludes college students in various programming flavours trust me) please dont ask all the time WITCH LANGUAGE IS THE BEST! OR SO! its just so personal and location and purpose dependant.

Sorry for all the bad english and sutch im tired as hell.

My favorite langs are(ASM,Fxx,ADA(defenatly best language in exsitence(with ASM OFC) yet but it could need some extra librarys but that will come ie for graphics)

Languages i can understand exist becouse of the human factor/time (C,C++(altho C is way cooler than c++),Pascal and so on)

Languages i dont use since practical problems mostly requires more reability is: Candy langs(python and so on).

Last but not least Python in real life may save you time in the moment of programming(if your not a vet ofc) but in the end all candy langs cost you more $ than java like langs becouse of various mentioned problems.

Yes i personally beleve that Python is as most other langs a Hello - Goodbye story,(a sleasy lovestory). 

Best Regards Mr. R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Whell i dont tink java is dead at all(it is more like a unstable finnacial chart that goes down and then upp like a rocket), still its in use all the time in diffrent companies.</p>
<p>Java aint COBOL(alltho some pepole seems to se it as COBOL when looking at java)</p>
<p>I tink that java could need some cleanups(as many other have stated), but the bottom line is that it works for the present tasks avable today, i tink i just need to say the old but so true phrase &#8220;a professional programmer is by widely defenition one who charges pepole/companys for money in exchange for some code&#8221; it dossent nessesarelly saying that this programmer is good. infact i dont know any by defenition good python programmer(currently) all again(so called top-notch) python programmers extensevly use fuctions that in the end is (native) so basicaly its uncontrolled C since they ofently dont know exactly what C python will use in the background (maybe its a little arrogant to make this to be just C but in general).</p>
<p>Young pepole especially(i am a young man,i am also an exception to this, i am 20yrs old atm) seem to tend to see java and old languages as &#8220;BAD OLD SHIT&#8221; becouse it wont produce a pretty game or other tings in a fast and to the eye a clean way. As some has stated Python has its advatages/disadvatages, but in the Real World python or any of these other Candy languages dossent seem to cut it becouse of triveal reasons like MTBF factors witch i think is a big concern that pepole has left out in this discussion/review when it comes to python, yes Java can be Resource consumeing(with a extra ! on the R) but the good advantage is that it IS exceptionally whell working in Real Time applications and in general systems and so on. python however(not saying that python is bad in general) dossent cut it i dont know any programmer that works withtin big coporations or anyting critical that says &#8220;you know python works&#8221; take mobile phones for example a common ting i hear from the industry is &#8220;shit we let some super python programmer do some python code still ist explicitly buggy alltho the programmer is the best you can find for money&#8221; then the end of the line is &#8220;Woops instead of hireing a programmer for a hire salary that would give us a direct working emedded java like system for a total cost of $xxx the total cost now with all fixes is $xxxxx. i think this resembles alittle of the atitude when ADA arrived, the line is why use C when you could use ADA that was from a practical standpoint undefinable many times better, whell i heard of some old pepole back in those days the old and true saying &#8220;it is not a technical problem it is a political problem reffering to the internals of the company&#8221; resulting in code that took more time to get working and in the end costed undefinable more $.</p>
<p>As a coclusion i would say that yes Candy languages is prefectly fine when it comes to short lived applications like a homemaid program that runs a calculate once then display fasioned program but its not suited for most programs that is programs who will have a runtime lifespan for hours or so. or applications that will cope with extensive ammounts of third part extensions, embedded devices is an excelet example in that matter.</p>
<p>I recomend Java over python in terms of &#8220;lifespan&#8221; and &#8220;general concistecy&#8221;</p>
<p>I recomend Cady lanuages (python and so on) for maybe general personal day use NOT FOR SERIOUS APPLICATIONS(tink resonable here)!</p>
<p>And to all young programmers lets say &lt;30(college educated or not) try out all common languages and get your own opinion in terms of (feel/style and sutch) not in (technical specs becouse most pepole doessent understand the tings under the hood really!, that icludes college students in various programming flavours trust me) please dont ask all the time WITCH LANGUAGE IS THE BEST! OR SO! its just so personal and location and purpose dependant.</p>
<p>Sorry for all the bad english and sutch im tired as hell.</p>
<p>My favorite langs are(ASM,Fxx,ADA(defenatly best language in exsitence(with ASM OFC) yet but it could need some extra librarys but that will come ie for graphics)</p>
<p>Languages i can understand exist becouse of the human factor/time (C,C++(altho C is way cooler than c++),Pascal and so on)</p>
<p>Languages i dont use since practical problems mostly requires more reability is: Candy langs(python and so on).</p>
<p>Last but not least Python in real life may save you time in the moment of programming(if your not a vet ofc) but in the end all candy langs cost you more $ than java like langs becouse of various mentioned problems.</p>
<p>Yes i personally beleve that Python is as most other langs a Hello &#8211; Goodbye story,(a sleasy lovestory). </p>
<p>Best Regards Mr. R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elliotte Rusty Harold</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-456952</link>
		<dc:creator>Elliotte Rusty Harold</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 12:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-456952</guid>
		<description>Emil,

You&#039;re demonstrating ignorance of modern compiler and optimization technology. Primitive types are primitive in that they do not support subclassing, method invocation, and other features of objects. How they are implemented is a detail. There is no reason the code you present cannot be implemented with object types that do not require allocating more than eight bytes per long. Indeed, if Long were the only type a good compiler would produce *identical* byte code to what you&#039;d get from compiling the above. javac just isn&#039;t that good, and the language spec doesn&#039;t really allow it to be that good. :-(

The code you present can be quite fast in languages with no primitive types such as Eiffel. Java doesn&#039;t do this for reasons of backwards compatibility with a language designed 15 years ago. Do not confuse the limitations of the Java VM with fundamental issues. Java made compromises in its type system it shouldn&#039;t have made because its inventors weren&#039;t sufficiently familiar with the state of the art in object oriented optimization. The state of the art has only advanced in the 15 years since Java was released. It is precisely Java&#039;s refusal to change the language to support modern constructs and optimizations that killed it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Emil,</p>
<p>You&#8217;re demonstrating ignorance of modern compiler and optimization technology. Primitive types are primitive in that they do not support subclassing, method invocation, and other features of objects. How they are implemented is a detail. There is no reason the code you present cannot be implemented with object types that do not require allocating more than eight bytes per long. Indeed, if Long were the only type a good compiler would produce *identical* byte code to what you&#8217;d get from compiling the above. javac just isn&#8217;t that good, and the language spec doesn&#8217;t really allow it to be that good. <img src='http://cafe.elharo.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif' alt=':-(' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>The code you present can be quite fast in languages with no primitive types such as Eiffel. Java doesn&#8217;t do this for reasons of backwards compatibility with a language designed 15 years ago. Do not confuse the limitations of the Java VM with fundamental issues. Java made compromises in its type system it shouldn&#8217;t have made because its inventors weren&#8217;t sufficiently familiar with the state of the art in object oriented optimization. The state of the art has only advanced in the 15 years since Java was released. It is precisely Java&#8217;s refusal to change the language to support modern constructs and optimizations that killed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emil Koutanov</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-456889</link>
		<dc:creator>Emil Koutanov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jan 2010 03:08:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-456889</guid>
		<description>Dear author,
When you say &quot;Today primitive types just complexify the language to no particular benefit.&quot; it shows that you have no understanding of performance computing. What facts can you present to back you claim?

Primitive types are &quot;primitive&quot; insofar as they don&#039;t require the instantiation (and subsequent destruction) of an object just to represent a scalar quantity that may be only 4 bytes wide. To employ full class semantics when all you want to do is to read to and write from a 4 byte contiguous chunk of memory is like killing a flea (not even a fly) with a very large sledge hammer. In terms of detrimental effects on performance, compile and run the following code:

public class AutoboxBenchmark {

  public static void main(String[] args) {
    final long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
    final long RUNS = 1000000000;
    
    for (long i = 0; i &lt; RUNS; i++)
      add(i, i - 1);
    
    final long took = System.currentTimeMillis() - start;
    System.out.println(String.format(&quot;%d runs took %.1f seconds&quot;, RUNS, took / 1000f));
  }
  
//  private static Long add(Long a, Long b) {
//    return a + b;
//  }
  
  private static long add(long a, long b) {
    return a + b;
  }
}

First run it with the method that uses primitives, and then with the one that uses object types. The performance difference is more than substantial.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear author,<br />
When you say &#8220;Today primitive types just complexify the language to no particular benefit.&#8221; it shows that you have no understanding of performance computing. What facts can you present to back you claim?</p>
<p>Primitive types are &#8220;primitive&#8221; insofar as they don&#8217;t require the instantiation (and subsequent destruction) of an object just to represent a scalar quantity that may be only 4 bytes wide. To employ full class semantics when all you want to do is to read to and write from a 4 byte contiguous chunk of memory is like killing a flea (not even a fly) with a very large sledge hammer. In terms of detrimental effects on performance, compile and run the following code:</p>
<p>public class AutoboxBenchmark {</p>
<p>  public static void main(String[] args) {<br />
    final long start = System.currentTimeMillis();<br />
    final long RUNS = 1000000000;</p>
<p>    for (long i = 0; i &lt; RUNS; i++)<br />
      add(i, i &#8211; 1);</p>
<p>    final long took = System.currentTimeMillis() &#8211; start;<br />
    System.out.println(String.format(&quot;%d runs took %.1f seconds&quot;, RUNS, took / 1000f));<br />
  }</p>
<p>//  private static Long add(Long a, Long b) {<br />
//    return a + b;<br />
//  }</p>
<p>  private static long add(long a, long b) {<br />
    return a + b;<br />
  }<br />
}</p>
<p>First run it with the method that uses primitives, and then with the one that uses object types. The performance difference is more than substantial.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dhruvin</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-454438</link>
		<dc:creator>dhruvin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Dec 2009 06:26:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-454438</guid>
		<description>I m 20 years old...Fresher currently working on Struts &amp; Hibernate..and one of my frnd went for python and he is regrating it due 2 no jobs in it..i just wonder what is the future in java struts hibernate etc...wat shuld i do for future??... :?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I m 20 years old&#8230;Fresher currently working on Struts &amp; Hibernate..and one of my frnd went for python and he is regrating it due 2 no jobs in it..i just wonder what is the future in java struts hibernate etc&#8230;wat shuld i do for future??&#8230; <img src='http://cafe.elharo.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_confused.gif' alt=':?' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Java Worker</title>
		<link>http://cafe.elharo.com/programming/java-is-dead-long-live-python/comment-page-2/#comment-448862</link>
		<dc:creator>Java Worker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cafe.elharo.com/?p=326#comment-448862</guid>
		<description>I develop Java code for companies in sectors such as finance and insurance. These companies usually have millions of lines of Java code, a lot of the code is often quite aged and has been through the hands of many programmers. In spite of this the code in general is surprisingly maintainable and extendable. I attribute this charactaristic to the general traits of Java code. Java code is generally very verbose and readable, dosent allow too many styles of code but still has a good balance of expressibility - something you learn to love when you dont have the luxury that smaller projects have to start from scratch. Java applications generally have very good error handling and the code is robust. Java programmers have for more than 10 years had a strong tradition of documenting and using Design Patterns - it makes me easily recognise the the design when I have to maintain and extend other programmers code. 

What makes Java so maintainable and extendable is also about the staggering availability of APIs, Frameworks, solutions and tools. I have never had to tell a customer &quot;it cant be done&quot; or &quot;it can be done but first I have to reinvent the wheel&quot;. If any changes were made to Java suchs that it was no longer backward compatible I would stand to loose what... 50-90% of all those APIs and Frameworks available today?? and Java would become just as useless as Python, C/C++ and many other languages for building enterprise scale systems. It also deserves mention that Java a few years back entered a golden age of development tools - can any other language boast a lineup like netbeans/idea/eclipse/jdeveloper?

Why would the &quot;warts&quot; of the java language such as primitive types have any bearing on its future? Python has different warts - so what? My customers are conserned if they can keep extending their codebase, if it will scale to twice as many users next year, if developers are sufficiently skilled/certified/available, if the brokers pushing the developers/consultants to customers know what they are selling, if the platform has good tools to enable productivity. I have no particular desire to code Java for the rest of my life but I dont expect Python to challenge Java in any near future. The only way to kill Java through the language design itself is to stuff the language with so many concepts (functional programming etc) that an average joe programmer will find it too complex to extend the code I leave behind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I develop Java code for companies in sectors such as finance and insurance. These companies usually have millions of lines of Java code, a lot of the code is often quite aged and has been through the hands of many programmers. In spite of this the code in general is surprisingly maintainable and extendable. I attribute this charactaristic to the general traits of Java code. Java code is generally very verbose and readable, dosent allow too many styles of code but still has a good balance of expressibility &#8211; something you learn to love when you dont have the luxury that smaller projects have to start from scratch. Java applications generally have very good error handling and the code is robust. Java programmers have for more than 10 years had a strong tradition of documenting and using Design Patterns &#8211; it makes me easily recognise the the design when I have to maintain and extend other programmers code. </p>
<p>What makes Java so maintainable and extendable is also about the staggering availability of APIs, Frameworks, solutions and tools. I have never had to tell a customer &#8220;it cant be done&#8221; or &#8220;it can be done but first I have to reinvent the wheel&#8221;. If any changes were made to Java suchs that it was no longer backward compatible I would stand to loose what&#8230; 50-90% of all those APIs and Frameworks available today?? and Java would become just as useless as Python, C/C++ and many other languages for building enterprise scale systems. It also deserves mention that Java a few years back entered a golden age of development tools &#8211; can any other language boast a lineup like netbeans/idea/eclipse/jdeveloper?</p>
<p>Why would the &#8220;warts&#8221; of the java language such as primitive types have any bearing on its future? Python has different warts &#8211; so what? My customers are conserned if they can keep extending their codebase, if it will scale to twice as many users next year, if developers are sufficiently skilled/certified/available, if the brokers pushing the developers/consultants to customers know what they are selling, if the platform has good tools to enable productivity. I have no particular desire to code Java for the rest of my life but I dont expect Python to challenge Java in any near future. The only way to kill Java through the language design itself is to stuff the language with so many concepts (functional programming etc) that an average joe programmer will find it too complex to extend the code I leave behind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
