We face a situation where Java itself is easy enough to use that most
engineers do not bother to learn the language well, even when they are doing
fairly sophisticated work. I have found it easy to construct simple
examples where respected engineers cannot tell what the initialization
values are.
Fundamental knowledge of the nature of polymorphism in Java is rare, in the
circles I run in. I have to tussle with peers constantly because they want
to take "the easy way" and end up with clever but ugly code. We need a code
of excellence in the working environment for Java, like that you find for
languages like C++.
I have to say that I am not only at a bit of a loss concerning what to do
about JSP on a day-by-day basis I am generally at a bit of a loss about how
to get my engineers to precisely understand Java itself. Even in our shop,
a lot of legacy Java code that sucks is being written. When I try to
explain to my peers that MyObject myObject = new MyObject() is hard coding
in Java, they don't really get it.
What I have decided to do is to encourage them to take the certification
exams.
I would like it if Sun had a tightly run forum on architectural issues,
including those in JSP, which was jealously guarded for clear and correct
content and widely available as a learning tool. Java, I think, is superior
in the long run, largely for architectural reasons. (If Python were secure,
I would be pushing Python. But that is a sort of silly "if". Python is not
and will not be secure.)
Where would you people recommend one go for great insights in the
architecture of the Java platform and associated technologies?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Stranathan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Turbine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 6:36 AM
Subject: Re: You make the decision. (Mini-Essay #1)
> I have to disagree with you some. JSP isn't poor because it
> FORCES you to put Java code into your HTML - if it's poor,
> it's because it ALLOWS you to do that. Just because people
> write bad examples of how to use it doesn't make it bad in
> and of itself, does it?
>
> Yes, I totally agree that mixing "backend" code with
> "frontend" HTML IS a "bad thing". But it's not entirely
> necessary to do things that way. (Okay, I'll give you some
> lattitude here - AFAIK, it's not exactly elementary to use
> JSP the RIGHT WAY.)
>
> My point being, I think when you publish this, it's
> important to make the distinction between "why JSP sucks"
> and "why these tutorials on JSP suck."
>
> Will Stranathan
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
