Talk:Java programming language: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Nick Johnson
(Concerns about Sun's core goals...)
imported>Tom Morris
 
(43 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{checklist
#REDIRECT [[Talk:Java (programming language)]]
|                abc = Java
|                cat1 = Computers
|                cat2 =
|                cat3 =
|          cat_check = y
|              status = 3
|        underlinked = y
|            cleanup = y
|                  by = --[[User:Eric M Gearhart|Eric M Gearhart]] 16:19, 7 April 2007 (CDT)
}}
 
== Concerns about Sun's core goals... ==
 
I have some concerns about how Sun's design goals are worded.  I think this is partially because the goals (as listed on Citizendium) don't completely match up with the goals (as listed in the referenced white paper), and partially because the white paper is a marketing document--barely technical at all.
 
<blockquote>
Have performance in mind. The language would be simple and compact, so that it could be mastered relatively easily
</blockquote>
I would have expected "performance" to mean runtime performance.  Here is seems to mean easy to learn.  The referenced white paper makes an argument for performance, and bases it on the garbage collector.
 
<blockquote>
Be reliable (garbage collection would be built-in, rather than left up to the programmer as in C++)
</blockquote>
Garbage collection would tend to make programs written in Java more reliable, but not necessarily the language itself.  However, this might serve to contribute to a popular opinion of Java programs being reliable.  BTW, garbage collection isn't "left up to the programmer as in C++", but rather a C++ programmer is responsible for memory management.  Garbage collection is simply a memory management strategy used by Java, and other languages.
 
<blockquote>
Have security built in (pointers were not to be a part of the language, due to buffer overflow security concerns)  
</blockquote>
Having security built in is a tough argument.  There have been many java programs with severe security problems.  In terms of [[buffer overflow]] concerns, dynamic [[data structure]]s may do more than eliminating pointers would.  Also, the language relies heavily on implicit pointers: every variable other than an integer, float, byte, and a few more atomic types is actually a pointer to a heap allocated object.
 
I don't have time right now, but I may come back and correct this tomorrow if no one else has.  --[[User:Nick Johnson|Nick Johnson]] 12:51, 16 April 2007 (CDT)

Latest revision as of 06:59, 8 August 2009

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Java_programming_language&oldid=23217"