p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

«‹›1784 »

salted hash browns: Mar 26, 2007; ykrop

rotor posted:

i havent really touched java in a while, but when i was, our product worked on the following java versions and only the following java versions:

1.4.0.1-3
1.4.0.5
1.4.0.8
1.4.1.0-i dont know 10 or so
1.4.1.12

my case was that there were these xml bugs that sort of came and went, sometimes the same ones, sometimes related ones. im sure other people had different issues.

rotor using java 1.4.x, old, etc

# ? Sep 5, 2012 06:50

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 00:45

multigl: Nov 22, 2005; "Who's cool and has two thumbs? This guy!"

rotor posted:

say what you will about flash but you just dont see that kind of poo poo in the flash world. poo poo written literally over a decade ago still runs fine without modification.

java is the run anywhere but on java platform.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 06:52

lamentable dustman: Apr 13, 2007; ððð

I can't think of the last time I had a version issue with java. My local machine, and build machine and production all run different versions of 1.6 now that I think about it

# ? Sep 5, 2012 06:53

rotor: Jun 11, 2001; classic case of pineapple derangement syndrome

salted hash browns posted:

rotor using java 1.4.x, old, etc

i released some open source stuff in 1.0.2 :q:

# ? Sep 5, 2012 06:54

vapid cutlery

Apr 17, 2007

php:

<?
"it's george costanza" ?>

something about java also makes it mind-numbingly boring to write

# ? Sep 5, 2012 07:44

Gazpacho: Jun 18, 2004; by Fluffdaddy; Slippery Tilde

vapid cutlery posted:

something about java also makes it mind-numbingly boring to write

Fart x = new SmellyFart();

# ? Sep 5, 2012 08:07

CaptainMeatpants: Jun 1, 2010

i've never had to write java without android being involved so for all i know it could very well be a decent experience

# ? Sep 5, 2012 08:27

etcetera08: Sep 11, 2008

the static keyword is the worst part of java

# ? Sep 5, 2012 09:51

Meiwaku: Jan 10, 2011; Fun for the whole family!

etcetera08 posted:

the static keyword is the worst part of java

You can't spell "BeanFactoryFactory" without "static".

The JVM has a lot of value, but Java the language is pretty terrible unless you have a hard on for typing. Java's OO design patterns remind me of that socially awkward kid who kept all his Legos sorted in fishing tackle boxes.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 11:49

Sapozhnik: Jan 2, 2005; Nap Ghost

i have a hardon for things being explicit

if u know what i mean

# ? Sep 5, 2012 12:03

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

if you cant handle strict typing because you cant figure out auto complete you are the worst.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 14:03

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

Meiwaku posted:

You can't spell "BeanFactoryFactory" without "static".

The JVM has a lot of value, but Java the language is pretty terrible unless you have a hard on for typing. Java's OO design patterns remind me of that socially awkward kid who kept all his Legos sorted in fishing tackle boxes.

not even the good kind of typing where the computer does all the easy but boring bullshit (see Mirah) or where it's really useful (Scala), you just have to type lots of extra poo poo

# ? Sep 5, 2012 14:13

Tiny Bug Child: Sep 11, 2004; Avoid Symmetry, Allow Complexity, Introduce Terror

types are a stupid concept

# ? Sep 5, 2012 14:20

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

Cocoa Crispies posted:

not even the good kind of typing where the computer does all the easy but boring bullshit (see Mirah)

that looks like it's just hiding stuff instead of doing the easy and boring stuff (i.e. documenting the code)

# ? Sep 5, 2012 14:56

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

rotor posted:

say what you will about flash but you just dont see that kind of poo poo in the flash world. poo poo written literally over a decade ago still runs fine without modification.

like exploits :getin:

# ? Sep 5, 2012 14:58

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Shaggar posted:

if you cant handle strict typing because you cant figure out auto complete you are the worst.

software engineering at it's finest here folks: we create work so we can write more tools to solve it.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:00

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

we create a solution to a problem (type safety) and then create tools to help us achieve it.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:01

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

Win8 Hetro Experie posted:

that looks like it's just hiding stuff instead of doing the easy and boring stuff (i.e. documenting the code)

like this stuff:

mirah posted:

import java.util.ArrayList

list = ArrayList.new
sb = StringBuffer.new("Hello")
sb.append(", world")
list.add(sb)
puts list

Note again that no types are actually declared here, and the types of �list� and �sb� are inferred from the results of constructing ArrayList and StringBuffer.

inferred by who? me?? i'd rather not infer stuff when writing code, if at all possible

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:10

Shaggar: Apr 26, 2006

no types are declared!_{except for ArrayList and StringBuffer}

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:12

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

Shaggar posted:

if you cant handle strict typing because you cant figure out auto complete you are the worst.

java doesn't have strict typing by any stretch

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:13

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

yep java is type safe alright

code:

String[] strings = new String[1];
Object[] objects = strings;
objects[0] = new Integer(1); // RUN-TIME FAILURE

and other bits http://twofoos.org/content/java-type-system-holes/

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:21

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Shaggar posted:

we create a solution to a problem (type safety) and then create tools to help us achieve it.

*adds type inference to notepad.exe*

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:24

Max Facetime: Apr 18, 2009

and now that i'm actually inferring that piece of code it's borderline nonsense

who would use a List<StringBuffer> variable instead of List<String>? Nobody, but thanks to types being hidden the author never caught that stupid mistake

way to go showcasing the strengths of your own language :bravo:

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:25

Tiny Bug Child: Sep 11, 2004; Avoid Symmetry, Allow Complexity, Introduce Terror

hey let's all use CollectionTypes full of SpecificKindsOfObjects, that'll be way better than just having an array with things in it

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:28

Sapozhnik: Jan 2, 2005; Nap Ghost

Python: "Explicit is better than implicit!"

code:

def somefunc(butt):
    butt.poke()

Alright, so something called 'butt' is getting poked, what does this involve?

^Z
$ find -name "*.py" -exec grep poke {} +

(a bunch of poo poo that may or may not be relevant, repeat for every directory that contains Python code I might be pulling in)

alright, that was fun, let's try Java

code:

public static void someMethod(Butt butt) throws DoesntSwingThatWayException {
    butt.poke();
}

ok cool see how I can just Ctrl+click "poke" and go to a definition, see that it's in an interface, then select something from a context menu that lets me see what implements that interface? As well as having all the Javadocs and sources available at my fingertips thanks to the ownage that is Maven?

Also it shows me the ways in which poking a butt in this particular context can go horribly wrong, and either I deal with that situation or I explicitly declare that I am aware of it but just don't give a gently caress, in which case at least somebody does have to care. Also there are some other presumably-catastrophic things subclassing RuntimeException that I can care about if I want to, but probably can't do anything about in the general case.

I'll acknowledge that all of this extra clarifying guff may or may not be useful depending on the circumstances, sure. If I'm encoding business rules for some chair-throwing retard who completely changes his mind about the rules of the game every Tuesday and I can't resign from that shithole then sure I'll encode the FotW business rules in Lua or whatever instead, because it's going to be a godawful shifting heap of quicksand no matter what I do, but I can't really come around to this perspective that duck typing is the only way to go ever and that if I don't do it that way then I am obviously wrong for reasons that are far too trivial to even condescend to explaining. Yes, I can unit test the code instead of having a type checker, but I'd prefer to unit test slightly more complex interactions than that. "You should understand the code you're editing" is fine advice locally, but I shouldn't be expected to understand the global intricacies of a potentially huge codebase, that's what layers of abstraction are for.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:46

Sneaking Mission: Nov 11, 2008

Mr Dog posted:

Python: "Explicit is better than implicit!"
code:
def somefunc(butt):
    butt.poke()
Alright, so something called 'butt' is getting poked, what does this involve?

^Z
$ find -name "*.py" -exec grep poke {} +

(a bunch of poo poo that may or may not be relevant, repeat for every directory that contains Python code I might be pulling in)

alright, that was fun, let's try Java
code:
public static void someMethod(Butt butt) throws DoesntSwingThatWayException {
    butt.poke();
}
ok cool see how I can just Ctrl+click "poke" and go to a definition, see that it's an interface, then select something from a context menu that lets me see what implements that interface? As well as having all the Javadocs and sources available at my fingertips thanks to the ownage that is Maven?

Also it shows me the ways in which poking a butt in this particular context can go horribly wrong, and either I deal with that situation or I explicitly declare that I am aware of it but just don't give a gently caress, in which case at least somebody does have to care. Also there are some other presumably-catastrophic things subclassing RuntimeException that I can care about if I want to, but probably can't do anything about in the general case.

I'll acknowledge that all of this extra clarifying guff may or may not be useful depending on the circumstances, sure. If I'm encoding business rules for some chair-throwing retard who completely changes his mind about the rules of the game every Tuesday and I can't resign from that shithole then sure I'll encode the FotW business rules in Lua or whatever instead, because it's going to be a godawful shifting heap of quicksand no matter what I do, but I can't really come around to this perspective that duck typing is the only way to go ever and that if I don't do it that way then I am obviously wrong for reasons that are far too trivial to even condescend to explaining. Yes, I can unit test the code instead of having a type checker, but I'd prefer to unit test slightly more complex interactions than that. "You should understand the code you're editing" is fine advice locally, but I shouldn't be expected to understand the global intricacies of a potentially huge codebase, that's what layers of abstraction are for.

this is a bad post and you should feel ashamed for having made it

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:47

multigl: Nov 22, 2005; "Who's cool and has two thumbs? This guy!"

Panic! At The cisco posted:

this is a bad post and you should feel ashamed for having made it

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:54

Tiny Bug Child: Sep 11, 2004; Avoid Symmetry, Allow Complexity, Introduce Terror

you've got to newly learn how a component works maybe 1/10th as often, in a worst-case scenario, as you have to write code that uses a component, and i would rather optimize for that case

# ? Sep 5, 2012 15:54

MononcQc: May 29, 2007

Gazpacho posted:

how did a language with guy steele's name on it not have lambdas for 15 years smh

Steele helped write the spec, not design the language itself. He was brought on the team after the design, so I don't think he had a say in it.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:04

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Mr Dog posted:

Python: "Explicit is better than implicit!"
code:
def somefunc(butt):
    butt.poke()
Alright, so something called 'butt' is getting poked, what does this involve?

^Z
$ find -name "*.py" -exec grep poke {} +

(a bunch of poo poo that may or may not be relevant, repeat for every directory that contains Python code I might be pulling in)

alright, that was fun, let's try Java
code:
public static void someMethod(Butt butt) throws DoesntSwingThatWayException {
    butt.poke();
}
ok cool see how I can just Ctrl+click "poke" and go to a definition, see that it's in an interface, then select something from a context menu that lets me see what implements that interface? As well as having all the Javadocs and sources available at my fingertips thanks to the ownage that is Maven?

Also it shows me the ways in which poking a butt in this particular context can go horribly wrong, and either I deal with that situation or I explicitly declare that I am aware of it but just don't give a gently caress, in which case at least somebody does have to care. Also there are some other presumably-catastrophic things subclassing RuntimeException that I can care about if I want to, but probably can't do anything about in the general case.

I'll acknowledge that all of this extra clarifying guff may or may not be useful depending on the circumstances, sure. If I'm encoding business rules for some chair-throwing retard who completely changes his mind about the rules of the game every Tuesday and I can't resign from that shithole then sure I'll encode the FotW business rules in Lua or whatever instead, because it's going to be a godawful shifting heap of quicksand no matter what I do, but I can't really come around to this perspective that duck typing is the only way to go ever and that if I don't do it that way then I am obviously wrong for reasons that are far too trivial to even condescend to explaining. Yes, I can unit test the code instead of having a type checker, but I'd prefer to unit test slightly more complex interactions than that. "You should understand the code you're editing" is fine advice locally, but I shouldn't be expected to understand the global intricacies of a potentially huge codebase, that's what layers of abstraction are for.

way to go full sperglord

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:06

Blotto Skorzany: Nov 7, 2008; He's a PSoC, loose and runnin'
came the whisper from each lip
And he's here to do some business with
the bad ADC on his chip
bad ADC on his chiiiiip

pray for the holy souls in spergatory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dlr90NLDp-0

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:09

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

yep the only way for an editor to work this poo poo out is to state it in triplicate you guys

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:12

Janitor Prime: Jan 22, 2004; PC LOAD LETTER

What da fuck does that mean; Fun Shoe

tef posted:

yep java is type safe alright
code:
String[] strings = new String[1];
Object[] objects = strings;
objects[0] = new Integer(1); // RUN-TIME FAILURE
and other bits http://twofoos.org/content/java-type-system-holes/

It's you, the dumbass who uses an array of objects, the most generic and useless type.

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:15

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

better yet, java needs to use hungarian notation and have editor support for it

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:17

tef: May 30, 2004; -> some l-system crap ->

Hard NOP Life posted:

It's you, the dumbass who uses an array of objects, the most generic and useless type.

good thing noone uses them in popular third party libraries

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:20

Opinion Haver: Apr 9, 2007

lol if your language can't express function types

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:28

syntaxrigger: Jul 7, 2011; Actually you owe me 6! But who's countin?

Panic! At The cisco posted:

this is a bad post and you should feel ashamed for having made it

tef posted:

way to go full sperglord

Hard NOP Life posted:

It's you, the dumbass who uses an array of objects, the most generic and useless type.

examples are hard

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:40

EVGA Longoria: Dec 25, 2005; Let's go exploring!

Mr Dog posted:

Python: "Explicit is better than implicit!"
code:
def somefunc(butt):
    butt.poke()
Alright, so something called 'butt' is getting poked, what does this involve?

^Z
$ find -name "*.py" -exec grep poke {} +

(a bunch of poo poo that may or may not be relevant, repeat for every directory that contains Python code I might be pulling in)

alright, that was fun, let's try Java
code:
public static void someMethod(Butt butt) throws DoesntSwingThatWayException {
    butt.poke();
}
ok cool see how I can just Ctrl+click "poke" and go to a definition

too bad you can do exactly this in python in Sublime Text, God's One True Text Editor

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:42

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

Shaggar posted:

no types are declared!_{except for ArrayList and StringBuffer}

but you'll (or someone less obtuse than you will) notice they're only declared once, and not on every assignment

also it's just less code

code:

import java.util.ArrayList

list = ArrayList.new
f = list
x = list

code:

// Generated from types.mirah
public class Types extends java.lang.Object {
  public static void main(java.lang.String[] argv) {
    java.util.ArrayList list = null;
    java.util.ArrayList f = null;
    java.util.ArrayList x = null;
    list = new java.util.ArrayList();
    f = list;
    x = list;
  }
}

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:50

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 00:45

Janitor Prime: Jan 22, 2004; PC LOAD LETTER

What da fuck does that mean; Fun Shoe

tef posted:

good thing noone uses them in good third party libraries

correct

# ? Sep 5, 2012 16:54

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > p-lang thread: (now (have you (problems two)))

«‹›1784 »