What language did they make Java in?

This is a discussion on What language did they make Java in? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I'm curious. -edit- My reasoning behind asking this: http://www.collegeboard.com/ap/pdf/a...rt_surveys.pdf To quote: Reasons for Changing • Safety is important at all ...

  1. #1
    Software Developer jverkoey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    University of Waterloo
    Posts
    1,903

    What language did they make Java in?

    I'm curious.

    -edit-
    My reasoning behind asking this:
    http://www.collegeboard.com/ap/pdf/a...rt_surveys.pdf

    To quote:
    Reasons for Changing
    • Safety is important at all levels of software design but especially when learning to program. Although there
    is some confusion about what a safe programming language is, we are using safety to mean: Any attempt to
    misinterpret data is caught at compile time or generates a well-specified error at run time. Java is a safe
    programming language. The Java compiler catches many inadvertent errors and the Java run time
    environment ensures that any attempt to misinterpet data will generate a well-defined exception.
    • A simple language should be used to teach programming in an introductory computer science course. A
    simple language will be grammatically as well as semantically uncomplicated. It will be easy to learn,
    because the notation will express programming concepts in a straightforward way. The appendix includes
    a comparison of some language features that illustrate how simplicity helped guide the APCS Ad Hoc
    Committee’s recommendation to switch to Java.
    • Object Orientation involving encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism, and abstraction, is an important
    approach in programming and program design. It is widely accepted and used in industry and is growing in
    popularity in the first and second college-level programming courses.
    Point 1: What the hell? Why is it that we are deeming it ok to let programmers become lazy with their code now?
    Point 2: Simple language? Are you kidding me? If you want to teach a simple language, teach basic or something! Java is right on par with C++ on difficulty level.
    Point 3: Object Orientation: And..umm, C++ doesn't have that? *raises eyebrow*

    It just annoys me that Sun goes out of their way to bash C++ in to the ground.


    -edit 2-
    And why does Sun have a C compiler?
    http://docs.sun.com/source/819-0494/index.html

    Seems a bit odd....
    Last edited by jverkoey; 07-01-2005 at 12:51 AM.

  2. #2
    Banned nickname_changed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by jverkoey
    Point 1: What the hell? Why is it that we are deeming it ok to let programmers become lazy with their code now?
    Where the hell did it say that? Making it harder for programmers to make a mistake does not mean lazy.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverkoey
    Point 2: Simple language? Are you kidding me? If you want to teach a simple language, teach basic or something! Java is right on par with C++ on difficulty level.
    Yeah, I hate spending hours chasing those simple memory errors in Java

    Quote Originally Posted by jverkoey
    Point 3: Object Orientation: And..umm, C++ doesn't have that? *raises eyebrow*
    C++ does have object orientation. It also works great as a hacky procedural langauge. Take a look at the C++ board, half the posts I can see there are using procedural methods and old C functions. You won't be tempted to do this in Java, and it will force students that are learning to do things the right way. Typedefs, #define macros, all make it easy to make your "object oriented C++ code" a royal mess and turn it back into C.

    Quote Originally Posted by jverkoey
    It just annoys me that Sun goes out of their way to bash C++ in to the ground.
    That's OK, "Micro$oft" go out of their way to bash Sun
    Last edited by nickname_changed; 07-01-2005 at 04:48 AM.

  3. #3
    Banned nickname_changed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    986
    Oh, and I don't think they "made Java" in any language (except maybe English to start with). The Java runtime engines however were probably written in C or C++. That doesn't prove anything though - beautiful houses can be made from blu-tac and rusty nails (a lot of them).

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    2,220
    Java was written in C++. Of course they're going to bash it into the ground if they're trying to sell Java.

    My reasons for not using Java would be:
    *Its slowness.
    *Its tendancy to hog memory.
    *The horrible, forced syntax.
    Last edited by Brian; 07-01-2005 at 08:19 AM. Reason: GRAMMAR

  5. #5
    Banned nickname_changed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    986
    *And the style - camel cased method names? Eww!

  6. #6
    C(++)(#)
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    309
    That is one thing I like about the university I plan on going to, they allow you take C++ courses instead of Java, but they do have a few "forced language" courses.
    To code is divine

  7. #7
    S Sang-drax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Göteborg, Sweden
    Posts
    2,072
    Java isn't 'made' or 'written' in another language. It is a language by itself, with specifications created and written by humans in a human language.

    Most Java implementations are likely written in C or C++, but it doesn't really matter. It is possible to write a C compiler in Java too.
    Last edited by Sang-drax : Tomorrow at 02:21 AM. Reason: Time travelling

  8. #8
    ... kermit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,528
    Quote Originally Posted by Sang-drax
    It is possible to write a C compiler in Java too.
    [flame bait]

    But that is just evil...

    [/flame bait]


  9. #9
    S Sang-drax's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Göteborg, Sweden
    Posts
    2,072
    Quote Originally Posted by jverkoey
    Java is right on par with C++ on difficulty level.
    No, it is not. Java is much, much simpler.
    • No multiple inheritance (virtual base classes etc.)
    • Very, very simple templates compared to C++
    • Not both pointers and references
    • Easier syntax (no pointer to a pointer to an array of pointers to a function)
    • Only one type (almost) of allocation (new)
    • EDIT: No macros
    • EDIT2: Garbage collection

    The list probably goes on.
    Last edited by Sang-drax; 07-01-2005 at 09:02 AM.

  10. #10
    Software Developer jverkoey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    University of Waterloo
    Posts
    1,903
    To clarify, I meant what did they make all of the compilers/virtual machines in. I don't see them pointing out to the press that mostly their whole base is founded upon C and C++....

    Also, I am not completely dull on the topic of Java, I have taken the time to learn the language, so that I may present a valid arguement. I have to say, from what I saw in the course that I was in from the other students, when people go from Java to C++, it's a pretty good jolt. Seeing as, because of the AP board switch, my school completely stopped teaching C++ that year, I started offering to teach kids C++ after school, and I noticed that the people who had learned Java initially had the most trouble understanding memory management and such, seeing as they've been working in an environment where you don't have to clean up after yourselves at all.

    There's something I read in the rationale for changing the C standard (to c99) http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg...onaleV5.10.pdf
    • Trust the programmer.
    • Don’t prevent the programmer from doing what needs to be done.
    • Keep the language small and simple.
    • Provide only one way to do an operation.
    • Make it fast, even if it is not guaranteed to be portable.
    These are the general rules of C, and I think they're fantastic. I know C isn't C++, but C++ builds off of C in a lot of ways, so much of the C standard applies in C++.

    Honestly, however, I think "The Spirit of Java" is quite the opposite.

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    722
    Quote Originally Posted by jverkoey
    It just annoys me that Sun goes out of their way to bash C++ in to the ground.
    That's what Aza Dotzler is doing to Opera


    About Java.... The java community always states that Java is real fast, faster than c++, and show results of stupid benchmarks.
    Why java is slow than c++ is easily understandble.
    • runtime constant type-checking (the often dynamic_cast of c++)
    • lots of heap memory allocation, unlike stack allocation which is much more faster
    • a giant API which it too modularized (lots of classes and method which stack up upon themselves)
    • bitcode, unzipping classes from jars
    • the GC !!!
    • all methods are virtual, much more overhead than calling non virtual methods
    • arrays themselves are classes, for which calling the subscript operator implies more method calling
    • the ideology of no public vars !!! only private with 2 methods for acess - yeah right, 2 virtual functions -> 2 pointers, memory bloat as always
    • use your imagination


    Java as been overused, and overapreciated, just because is favours lazyness, and has über l33t IDEs. Java is no good for a real application, only for learning (OOP), and for webpages applets...

  12. #12
    Crazy Fool Perspective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,640
    >>Java is no good for a real application

    hehe, that one made me giggle. Of course there's no *real* applications written in Java and if anyone ever wrote, say for example a 2.5 million line code application platform with a dynamic plug-in architecture in java, it would never pan out

    oh, and the rich library set, what were they thinking? Everyone knows its super optimal to reinvent the wheel everytime you need commonly used functionality

    man, i haven't been that sarcastic in a long time... but i got sucked into the language war
    /me leaves the language war.

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    722
    Quote Originally Posted by Perspective
    Of course there's no *real* applications written in Java and if anyone ever wrote, say for example a 2.5 million line code application platform with a dynamic plug-in architecture in java, it would never pan out
    I'd prefer netbeans which is also in Java. But the point isn't in this case the Java itself, but the Java mentality. A java only programmer doesn't care the least about memory, and resources consuptiom, because the Java mentality says, let the GC or the VM handle it. someone that learns Java never learns those important issues. Then you'll have bloated, slow, applications, like Azureus for instance. (i've used Azureus for a long time - got sick of it).
    Fortunatly Eclipse and netbeans are made by professional experienced programmers

    Quote Originally Posted by Perspective
    oh, and the rich library set, what were they thinking? Everyone knows its super optimal to reinvent the wheel everytime you need commonly used functionality
    yes it's rich, but have you ever looked at the source ?? for Collection each regular method call may stack about 2 to 7~8 different methods calls from the inside. Each GUI call can go up to 10~16 calls till it reaches a native function... That not a ideal of efficiency. Only interface, rich interface.
    Last edited by xErath; 07-01-2005 at 11:28 PM.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    470
    C++ does have object orientation. It also works great as a hacky procedural langauge.
    stovellp, in Java you could write all your functions as statics and you'd have something similar to a C functional program.

    Take a look at the C++ board, half the posts I can see there are using procedural methods and old C functions.
    Even in an object oriented development, using a few C functions for minor utility isn't bad.

    You won't be tempted to do this in Java, and it will force students that are learning to do things the right way. Typedefs, #define macros, all make it easy to make your "object oriented C++ code" a royal mess and turn it back into C.
    See above about Java static methods.

  15. #15
    Registered User major_small's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    2,787
    going from C++ to java, I have to say I do like the GC, but only because it allows me to be lazy. I do believe, however, that it's a terrible habit to get into, and even worse to teach to fresh programmers... no matter what you think, that memory has to be taken care of. somebody has to do it. I personally would rather do it myself.

    As far as java's forced OOP, from a learning programmer's point of view, System.out.print() is the same as printf(), so the learning still doesn't take place. Just because you tell a new programmer they're using a class doesn't mean they now know how to write an OOP--that's a big point of using classes--you can use it without knowing how it works.

    and as far as I'm concerned, just because you use cout or System.out.println in your program doesn't make your program OO. for example, a simple hello world program (see below). I wouldn't consider that an OOP. and it's a good point for how OOP isn't always the best way to go. if anything, C++ tells you when it's a good time to use OOP and when it's not.

    Code:
    #include<iostream>
    int main()
    {
        std::cout<<"Hello World";
        return 0;
    }
    Last edited by major_small; 07-01-2005 at 10:37 PM.
    Join is in our Unofficial Cprog IRC channel
    Server: irc.phoenixradio.org
    Channel: #Tech


    Team Cprog Folding@Home: Team #43476
    Download it Here
    Detailed Stats Here
    More Detailed Stats
    52 Members so far, are YOU a member?
    Current team score: 1223226 (ranked 374 of 45152)

    The CBoard team is doing better than 99.16% of the other teams
    Top 5 Members: Xterria(518175), pianorain(118517), Bennet(64957), JaWiB(55610), alphaoide(44374)

    Last Updated on: Wed, 30 Aug, 2006 @ 2:30 PM EDT

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. What's up with Java programmers, anyway?
    By Sebastiani in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 07:17 AM
  2. Java for real-time applications
    By zacs7 in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-26-2008, 07:34 AM
  3. Why C Matters
    By DavidP in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 01-16-2008, 09:09 AM
  4. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 08-13-2004, 12:11 AM
  5. C/C++ Vs Java
    By Spectrum48k in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 10-21-2002, 10:06 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21