On Sat, 2013-02-23 at 21:44 +0400, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: […] > I have to say that no amount of provided out of the box nice libraries > and top-notch GC help alleviate the dire need for plain value-types and > some kind of terseness (rows of static final int xyz = blah; to define a > bunch of constants). With Java version being 5 or 6 (as is usually the > case in production ATM) there is basically not a single construct to > avoid horrible duplication of information on each line.
Maybe in Java 1.4, 8 years ago a plethora of public static final int constants, but these days seeing that implies a bad design, a complete lack of updating/refactoring of the software to modern Java features, or simple laziness. Java 5 introduced more than generics. The G1 GC is a significant improvements to Java. Java supports value types, albeit as objects on the heap. Give me an example of the problem so we can approach this with more than waffly statements. Far too few programmers use the final keyword properly/effectively. > There are few shortcuts in Java 7, and even more stuff in Java 8 but all > of it is coming horribly too late and doesn't fix the "big picture". > Plus that has to propagate into the mainstream. This is Java's serious problem. There are still people using Java 1.4.2 because they can't be bothered to update to Java 5 let alone 7. […] I have many problems with Java, it is very verbose, but it needs to be criticized in a fair manner not in a "slag off" way. Clearly everyone on this list is going to prefer D over Java, but that is not permission to use inappropriate argumentation. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:[email protected] 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: [email protected] London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
