On Thursday, 4 September 2014 at 14:19:02 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
wrote:
On 26/08/2014 09:46, Chris wrote:
The problem was that Java didn't behave as expected on
Windows. Things
that worked fine on Linux and OS X didn't work on Windows
(even simple
things like deleting files). User reported all sorts of
problems, one of
them being that the Java Access Bridge didn't work. Why,
nobody knows.
The lack of a proper sound API / library. Then there was the
versioning
hell with JRE/JVM and having to tell users what version they
had to
download (the non tech savvy crowd). I know that MS doesn't
make it easy
for Java either. Well, I could have sorted the problems out
with Java
web start, SWT and all that kind of stuff. Instead, I learned
D which I
can compile and run on each platform without a problem.
The promise of "Write once run everywhere" is still pretty much
accurate if you stick to core Java code and libraries. Of
course once you start using OS/implementation specific code you
will have to code more carefully, and are more likely to
encounter cross-platform problems. That's just the nature of
things, you can't say it's a failure of Java.
It's like coding in D using lots of malloc/free in your code,
and then when your program breaks, you complain that "the D GC
doesn't work!". Of course the GC only is only guaranteed to
work if you stick to GC-managed memory.
I can expect the Java Access Bridge to work, because Java offers
it as a built-in technology. If it does not work, it's a broken
promise. Simple as that.
To be honest I smell a load of Java-biased *BS* here,
especially because of this sentence:
"Instead, I learned D which I can compile and run on each
platform without a problem."
Which is true. I could compile it on Linux, OS X and Windows. It
was almost trivial to write a DLL that third party software can
use. Try that with Java and tell me if it's trivially easy. I
think what you meant was _anti_-Java *BS*. I'm only writing about
my experience with the two languages. The one worked for me, the
other didn't.
Actually virtually all other languages, including D, are just
as bad as Java (if not worse) in the aspects mentioned above.
For example, if you write code which heavily interacts with the
filesystem, you are bound to encounter platform/OS-specific
problems no matter what language. I'd bet money those "even
simple things like deleting files", you'd have in D as well. At
least in Java the APIs they are usually careful to specify
which aspects of behavior are implementation-specific.
Well, my statement refered to the fact that Java f**ked up big
time there, which clearly breaks the promise "write once, run
everywhere", especially because dealing with files is a feature
one would expect to be part and parcel of a programming language.
Deleting files should not give you a headache. Basically what
you're saying is "Java is cross-platform but it's not, but hey,
other languages are just as bad!". Well, then they should stop
using the word "cross-platform" when advertising their language.
In other cases, such as the sound library or accessibility
library, most other cross-platform language don't even have
those!, so how can you be saying that D runs better on each
platform that Java?..
(Does a non-existent library run perfectly on every conceivable
platform? one could say yes...)
D interfaces to existing audio / sound libraries in C
(libsndfile, portaudio). All you have to do is to include those
libs and call the functions you need. Doing this with Java is a
bit more complicated (you'll probably need tools).
You are welcome to report on any serious issues you've
encountered when porting D programs to various platforms. Maybe
it can be fixed in the core of the language and it would help to
make D even more portable. A lot of cross-platform issues can be
dealt with by including "version(Windows/Posix ...)" in your code.
