I have to say that this article is extremely disappointing. I think the author is expressing clear bias and an unfamiliarity with languages he is criticizing.
About the only factual statement made in the entire article is that Java will "help you get a job." This being one of the worst reasons to learn a language, in my not-so-humble opinion.
Yes, Java does have strong institutional presence in the industry, but not often for any good reasons. But that's not a point in its favor, but a neutral one at best.
The syntax, however, is absolutely not "more readable" than C or C++. Java is rather more verbose than modern idiomatic C++, and significantly less readable than C#. It is also certainly not easier to understand than Python, and I question the author's qualification to make such an assertion. Having tutored several beginners in both Java and Python, I can say with certainty that Java is abominably more complicated and difficult for beginners to understand.
I'd also assert that Java's concept of OOP is fundamentally broken. It tried, and failed, to be a "better C++" by going whole-hog on Simula-style OOP, and the travesty of "Enterprisey" code, with its FactoryFactories and CommandManagerFactoryActors, is exemplary of everything wrong with the Java platform and community. Java programmers read GoF as their Bible, when they should read it as the cautionary tale that it is.
Alan Kay was right: Java is not OOP, but Smalltalk is.
Author, stick to your day job. Please.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I have to say that this article is extremely disappointing. I think the author is expressing clear bias and an unfamiliarity with languages he is criticizing.
About the only factual statement made in the entire article is that Java will "help you get a job." This being one of the worst reasons to learn a language, in my not-so-humble opinion.
Yes, Java does have strong institutional presence in the industry, but not often for any good reasons. But that's not a point in its favor, but a neutral one at best.
The syntax, however, is absolutely not "more readable" than C or C++. Java is rather more verbose than modern idiomatic C++, and significantly less readable than C#. It is also certainly not easier to understand than Python, and I question the author's qualification to make such an assertion. Having tutored several beginners in both Java and Python, I can say with certainty that Java is abominably more complicated and difficult for beginners to understand.
I'd also assert that Java's concept of OOP is fundamentally broken. It tried, and failed, to be a "better C++" by going whole-hog on Simula-style OOP, and the travesty of "Enterprisey" code, with its FactoryFactories and CommandManagerFactoryActors, is exemplary of everything wrong with the Java platform and community. Java programmers read GoF as their Bible, when they should read it as the cautionary tale that it is.
Alan Kay was right: Java is not OOP, but Smalltalk is.
Author, stick to your day job. Please.