Language Switch –Java or C++ & Perplexing: Unemployed Java Programmers
-
Oh boy, I smell a language war here, but whataheck, I'm up for it :) 1. Java containers are harder to use than STL containers (no type safety) False. It's actually more a matter of opinion. Just because you have to cast does not mean that it's harder to use. Besides, it may not be type-safe at compile time but it is at run-time. If the cast is invalid, you get an exception. In C++, traditional casts are not checked at all. Also, STL's function names are not intuitive. I mean, what novice programmer would think that vector.push_back() would do the same as Vector.add()? 2. Java library is full of "depreciated" classes and methods. It is changing too quickly, and it is hard to find what you need. You mean "deprecated". Yep, that's a definite pain sometimes. The biggest offender I've found is the java.util.Date class, which I use a lot. 3. Messing with CLASSPATH and all those files I haven't experienced any issues with the CLASSPATH. You basically set it and forget it. Then you package your CLASS files inside JARs and everything's fine. 4. No exe file after compilation Yeah, on Windows I can see how someone may not like that. But remember EXE files are used only on Windows, which is just one of Java's platforms. You can always create a BAT file that runs the JVM on your CLASS file. Also, I believe there are Java compilers which will create platform-specific EXEs. 5. No decent IDE. Well, that's not Java's fault, is it? Microsoft had a nice one for a while: Visual J++. I'm using one called JCreator which is very similar to DevStudio (and written in C++ :-O). Again, this is a matter of opinion. Regards, Alvaro
Oh boy, I smell a language war here, but whataheck, I'm up for it Not at all. In fact, I like Java (the language itself, not the libraries). 1. I still think STL containers are easier than Java containers, but it may be only my opinion. 2. We agree on this one. 3. O.K. if you say so. To be honest, I didn't have much problems either, however, I still don't like the concept. 4. No comments. 5. JCreator is my favourite too. However, it is still pretty far behind Microsoft VS (especially VS.NET) I vote pro drink :beer:
-
1. True 2. This is not easier at all. 3. True 4. True (this one is great) 5. Sometimes easier, sometimes not. 6. True, but I don't like Java threading model. 7. Java String sucks. But see the other way around: 1. Java containers are harder to use than STL containers (no type safety) 2. Java library is full of "depreciated" classes and methods. It is changing too quickly, and it is hard to find what you need. 3. Messing with CLASSPATH and all those files 4. No exe file after compilation 5. No decent IDE. I vote pro drink :beer:
-
Oh boy, I smell a language war here, but whataheck, I'm up for it :) 1. Java containers are harder to use than STL containers (no type safety) False. It's actually more a matter of opinion. Just because you have to cast does not mean that it's harder to use. Besides, it may not be type-safe at compile time but it is at run-time. If the cast is invalid, you get an exception. In C++, traditional casts are not checked at all. Also, STL's function names are not intuitive. I mean, what novice programmer would think that vector.push_back() would do the same as Vector.add()? 2. Java library is full of "depreciated" classes and methods. It is changing too quickly, and it is hard to find what you need. You mean "deprecated". Yep, that's a definite pain sometimes. The biggest offender I've found is the java.util.Date class, which I use a lot. 3. Messing with CLASSPATH and all those files I haven't experienced any issues with the CLASSPATH. You basically set it and forget it. Then you package your CLASS files inside JARs and everything's fine. 4. No exe file after compilation Yeah, on Windows I can see how someone may not like that. But remember EXE files are used only on Windows, which is just one of Java's platforms. You can always create a BAT file that runs the JVM on your CLASS file. Also, I believe there are Java compilers which will create platform-specific EXEs. 5. No decent IDE. Well, that's not Java's fault, is it? Microsoft had a nice one for a while: Visual J++. I'm using one called JCreator which is very similar to DevStudio (and written in C++ :-O). Again, this is a matter of opinion. Regards, Alvaro
-
To name a few - building UIs, string handling, sockets, threading, collection classes and JDBC UI - easier with C++ if you have a good library sring handling - easier with C++ sockets - I agree here. threading - I disagree here collection classes - I STRONGLY disagree here. STL classes are far easier to use JDBC - what's so easy about JDBC? I vote pro drink :beer:
-
Rich, The market stinks everywhere. Here in Irvine, which is another hotbed of IT jobs (at one point, it was called The New Silicon Valley), there are very few jobs out there right now regardless of what language you use. I think that .NET will be pretty well received. I know of a few shops who are going to 100% .NET (Dundas is a good example of a commercial vendor who is moving to .NET). I wouldn't write it off. And if you're a java developer, C# will be a breeze for you to pick up. -Mike Stevenson God Bless America, God Bless the World News - Forum - Games - Comedy - Chat Click: http://www.USAvsAfghanistan.com
-
Hey Giles, you never did response to all our responses about your astronomy stuff. Did we overwhelm you? :) To hell with those thin-skinned pillow-biters. - Me, 10/03/2001
Just a bit. Its nice to know that so many people are into it. I checked out some of the recommended sites, and can't belive how big some of those 'home' telescopes are. Some of them must be quater of a ton with all the metal that goes into the stands. As I live in London, I don't think something for the garden is what I need. I would like to get about the biggest portable that will go in the car, so I can get into the sticks and get some good light. Saying that, maybe I should buy a house in the sticks, and go for that 16 inch monster, with a dome and all. I think I posted the question one evening before going to bed, and the next day I was up early to go visit some people for a few days. Everyone thoughts were much appreciated, and gave me a pretty good starting point. Having thought about it, I would really like to have a go at the photography side of it which was why I was thinking digital cameras. Giles
