|
Accurate[^]
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
Java is ancient crufty* stuff. 
free dictionary says*:
1. Trash, debris, or other unwanted matter that accumulates over time.
2. Unnecessary digital information that accumulates over time, such as unneeded files or obsolete lines of code in software:
Crufty - definition of Crufty by The Free Dictionary[^]
|
|
|
|
|
2 definitely describes Java.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I'll bite. Why do so many folks here hate Java? I've never used it but could see doing so for certain types of applications. Is it that C# has now surpassed it, with better performance while still offering a good library and portability?
|
|
|
|
|
If you had programmed in it you'd likely hate it as well. Also, from a cyber security standpoint Java, even after all these years, is almost fundamentally as insecure as Flash player.
|
|
|
|
|
Java (the language) is actually really nice in many ways. I’m (mostly) a C# developer (been using since 2001) and Java is very similar.
but honestly the ecosystem really is crusty.
I mean there’s the whole thing about Microsoft being a Giant & controlling things but in many ways that helped C#.
Java, on the other hand feels like it wasn’t owned by one entity (and it wasn’t).
It feels like it goes in multiple directions to get the same result & it is very difficult to determine which one is the mainstream.
This is probably Oracle’s fault a lot. It definitely felt like they took ownership simply as a payday (thinking they’d win the suit against Google & lots of $$$).
Not like they took it too make it better.
So there is that schism too. when you go to install the SDK which one do you select? OpenJava, Oracle or what? It’s a very odd thing.
Then there are other things too like unit testing & coverage tools.
When you see the official sites and the backing for those things they look like some hacked up site from 1994 or something. Lots of things like that just make it a pain when you really go to do actual development that you have to support for a prod release.
Lots of cruft and half-way complete things and difficult old crusty documentation.
You only find this out when you get into it and need to do something that will be in prod.
If you just hobby around with it you’ll think everything is okay because there is a lot of fun stuff and I really like the language.
That’s my experience anyways — which comes from having to support & rewrite a medium sized app that was written in 1997 or so.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Why do so many folks here hate Java?
Greg Utas wrote: I've never used it
Do you see the connection? 
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
On an embedded site I frequent I posted an article about whether C is coming to the end of it's life.
The old timers there said that they don't use or need C++ because of classes, inheritance and all that nonsense.
But when a new comer asks about getting started with Arduino they recommend the Arduino IDE as being the easiest path.
WTF
The most expensive tool is a cheap tool. Gareth Branwyn
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
At work, I'm forced to use only C for firmware programming. I believe C++ would have been a better choice.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
My thoughts as well! 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm reading a book right now (Real-World Cryptography - Manning Publisher[^]).
In chapter 3 it provided a code example of how to generate a MAC (Message Authentication Code) using Rust.
It didn't give the crates (import libraries) that were required.  (I'm slow, I need everything.)
Also, the example was two functions for generating and then reading the MAC but there was no example of the input (I'm slow, I need everything).
Which brings me to my point.
Do you notice that books get you so far into a subject (about 1 - 3 chapters) and then they get so far out there that you cannot move on further? You're just stuck. The author has left me behind. (I'm slow, I need everything.)
So I have a lot of books that I read first 3 chapters & then fall into oblivion. (I'm slow, I need everything.)
Well, that is my experience. Does that happen to you?
|
|
|
|
|
Do they distribute the source code that accompanies the book somewhere? You may be able to use that to fill in the gaps, at least in this case.
To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Do they distribute the source code that accompanies the book somewhere? You may be able to use that to fill in the gaps, at least in this case.
Sheesh, it's like you expect me to do everything. 
It's a good point. I will look and see if code is on github. Probably is (but I'm slow, I need everything -- handed to me on a sliver plate). 
|
|
|
|
|
I replied but it got crosslinked -- see it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I got into the third sentence and then got lost. (I'm slow, I need everything.)
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I got into the third sentence and then got lost. (I'm slow, I need everything.)
I knew there were more of me out there.
|
|
|
|
|
I went to the official book site: Real-World Cryptography[^] and found a Code download.
I downloaded it and it had only 4 files (with file extension .adoc) ???
I opened up the one that seemed to be the one for the MAC source (mac.adoc) but it was a bunch of notes to the author (from editors).
No source code.
I feel a bit vindicated. Let the ignorance via laziness continue!!!
EDIT - CROSSLINKED - this was a reply to codewitch.
|
|
|
|
|
For me, this happens for one of two reasons.
First, I didn't pay enough attention to the early material, so that when the author uses it later I get lost. I go back, read the early stuff again, and the newer material starts to make sense.
Second, the author forgot the most important rule in writing: consider your audience. They take small, easy steps in the beginning. Once that part's done, they think they can change over to much bigger steps, having forgotten that their reader might still be learning the material and needs smaller steps.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I am often guilty of your first point, but your 2nd point is definitely the one I’m talking about running into very often. 
|
|
|
|
|
That's the primary reason why I no longer buy tech books very often. The writing is really poor.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
There are a couple of publishers (O’Reilly, Manning, No Starch) who still (actually) edit most of their materials but problems still leak through.
|
|
|
|
|
I do like the O'Reilly quick references. They're brief and give you the basic information without fluff and a lot of worthless screen captures.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I'd expect a 'Hello MAC World' program at least within three chapters which gives all instructions from scratch. Otherwise beginners will get switched off.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep that’s exactly what I was thinking. The sample almost got me there but not quite.
I will def take time & get it working just wanted to see it running real fast to feel some success.
|
|
|
|
|
I am with you on the crates/imports.
Maybe “add them at the bottom of the examples as comments” would be a good publishing guideline for all code samples. ?
They are kind of noisy at the top
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
