Java is Dead; Long Live Python
cafe.elharo.com
cafe.elharo.com
Java is everywhere, and the VM is high performance. Its library range is the best, except for C in some settings. The operating system wars are long over and the language ones are becoming irrelevant - it's about VMs now and JVM is a strong contender. One of the links off here: http://www.malhar.net/sriram/kilim/ show it nuking erlang under high loads for similar concurency patterns.
I wish it were dead. I've moved myself out of the core development team at work in order to avoid dealing with the frustrating lethargy of developing with it. What development I now do is tooling which I do entirely in python, using django, web2py and base libraries when I need web stuff. Python allows me to prorgam with all the power of the unix platform even though my C is weak and unpracticed.
But Java still has outright strengths. When support issues come up for the main product our java source code is very readable, the team thrives in spite of being distributed, the product is stable, those customers who need library compatibility with us can get it with Java. Some of the python libraries are in the lead across the board, but others are weak. Nothing in the python world comes close to cayanne for combining simplicity and power for object relational modeling (most of the offerings are less powerful and more difficult to install, sqlalchemy is extremely inaccessible).
I'm expecting the classy rollout of Python 3 to kill off the other mainstream scripting languages. But it still has large flaws. Twisted is magnificent, but if you need to do threading python stinks even more than standard java. Also, the 'self' problem and syntactic separations that prevent you from creating functions inline point to a weaknses in the settlement. I think iolanguage is the next step in the right direction. There are some areas I don't think even that could challenge Java though - java wins when you have teams working on a project.
It certainly does not mean "dead" as in "not being used". Such a term -- let's call it "the True Death" -- would be nigh-useless in a discussion of computer languages, because very few successful languages reach that state. The code doesn't rot. COBOL lives. FORTRAN most definitely lives. Lisp is older than everything and it is very much alive. Pascal might be an exception: You really never hear of anyone writing new Pascal code. Perhaps it is approaching the True Death. Or perhaps some of the more obscure assembly languages of decades past are Truly Dead. But I wouldn't be surprised if they weren't. There are people writing Atari 2600 assembly language right now. Maybe even more than there were in 1982.
The discussion is complicated by the evolution of languages and the desire to rehabilitate old trademarks. Applesoft BASIC is far closer to the True Death than "Basic" is, because Microsoft stole the name and applied it to a rather different creature. "Lisp" cannot die, but you could point to one of the thousand dead dialects of Lisp and call that dialect a "Truly Dead language". Eventually you get trapped in a pointless semantic debate, like the one you flirt with here: If the JVM is alive but Java is dead, is Java alive?
At any rate, now that we've established what we mean: Yeah, Java is arguably "dead". It has reached an equilibrium where anything you might do to change the design creates more problems than it solves: It breaks back compatibility, or it creates an impenetrably complex monster that only a relatively small number of people can understand. It's also very easy to argue that Microsoft Windows "died" around the release of Windows XP: Since then, the company has devoted uncounted thousands of programmer-hours to create an OS that much of the market has concluded is no improvement over XP. That's what static equilibrium looks like.
But this doesn't mean that we won't have Java and Windows to complain about for years and years, if not decades and decades. In software the dead do not truly die. They just stalk the earth as vampires. (I originally wanted to say "zombies", but that's wrong. Zombies are slow and stupid. Undead languages, on the other hand, are often amazingly competent and smart despite being technically dead. They've got a lot of experience.)
* Current usage - how much of it is deployed.
* Growth - how much it's being used for new projects, worked on, written about, etc...
For instance, Cobol is still fairly widely deployed in some environments, but growth is probably negative, as it's being replaced by Java. Java is very widely used, and is still probably growing, although probably not as much as things like Ruby, which have grown a lot; which is easy when you start from a small base.
If dead = in stasis, then computer languages are like popular comic book characters. They may die, but someone will eventually bring them back.
<pedantism>
12% of that sentence was the word "actually." In all but the shortest sentences, it's strange to see an adverb as the most common word.Edit: Thought about this more, and some people almost certainly say "like" more than any other word. (Un)surprisingly, your sentence loses little meaning if the actuallies are replaced with likes, commas optional.
</pedantism>Edit: also, there are many new Delphi/Pascal projects, just check out http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/ the "True Death" is highly exaggerated.
I'm not trolling. I've only used raw SQL and SQLAlchemy so I'm basically orm blind atm. I'd like to know what I'm missing :) tia
I eventually got to the stage where I had a product built on top of it, working, but I still didn't feel like I knew the framework fluently. I've never been in that position before. Frustating, because it means if I do more work on that codebase I'll either have to struggle through again or else throw it away and write on top of something else.
ORM is supposed to be good for nailing the right schema and then abstracting it away without a performance hit. That's what I get with Cayenne. I found the opposite with sqlalchemy - it's more difficult than it would have been for me to have just written the queries inline, or rolled my own simple ORM. I think it's because it's just too thick - unusual for a python framework - usually they're the opposite.
It's been a year since I looked at it so I'm a bit vague above, but I gave it a go for over two years on and off.
I agree that it needs to be improved, but that's largely because the product is so powerful and complex, writing sufficient documentation is a herculean effort in and of itself.
If you have significant experience with Hibernate, you can pick up SQLAlchemy very fast. One of my friends wanted to switch from Django ORM to SQLAlchemy but was being frustrated by lack of SA documents. I had him build a couple of throwaway systems (just domain model and databse - no web framework gymnastics - which are very painful in Java) with Hibernate and also read through Martin Fowler's "Enterprise Patterns" book to pick up some of the terminology (e.g:- Unit Of Work). This seemed to work. Just throwing it out there, fwiw.
Languages don't die till everyone using them is dead. And you better burn the books too, because some hobbyist will come along and resurrect the language if you wait long enough.
So, however stiff it may look, ASM will continue to MOV, we'll continue to see C around, and goto is not going anywhere.
My big issue with language wars is everyone who jumps in pretty much brings their own experience and past projects to the table. It's all anecdotal. It's like asking all your friends what kind of car you should buy.
Even your hardcore gear-head friends will have non-rationally based biases. Audi and BMW makes pretty similar cars in most respects, but you almost always find die-hard Audi fans or die-hard BMW fans who will happily tell you at length why brand A is the best and brand B sucks, when the reality is brands A and B are both pretty good.
My day job is, and has been for 10 years, working with the commercial ATG E-Commerce framework built on J2EE. It's typically implemented by Fortune 500 type companies. There's no equivalent personalization, B2C/B2B commerce, marketing, reporting, etc... framework with the same maturity and proven scalability available in Ruby or Perl or Python or PHP. Does that mean Java is better than Ruby? No, not at all. It means for a certain type of site for a certain type of customer I'd whole heartedly recommend a Java based solution.
Because my day job is spent with Java, I tend to gravitate toward other Java based work in my spare time (I really like the Seam framework from JBoss). I learn things that are applicable back and forth all the time. For me, Java is my preferred language. It doesn't mean it's better or worse than any other language for you or for Tim or whoever. It also doesn't mean it's better or worse for project X, without knowing what project X is.
I haven't seen a language war that wasn't 99% really strong polar opinion based almost exclusively on individual anecdotal experience.
You can have an intelligent language argument, and you can learn something even from an unintelligent one. One of the most telling things is, are there languages that you thought were reasonable that nobody even bothers chipping in to defend. Nobody jumps in to advocate C++ for a quick regex-heavy text file manipulation job, or quick webserver development. Nobody jumps in to advocate Python for mobile applications, or for massively parallel programming. Nobody jumps in to advocate Javascript for offline image processing.
Sure, usually the two sides of a language war talk past each other. You can still learn a lot from the talking points.
If you want to claim that every language is useful and good in its own special way, you may have to accept that COBOL is primarily good at being compatible with old systems based on COBOL, and Pascal is useful mainly for failing to teach computer programming in the 1980s.
Well, it doesn't alone however the concepts that are available in a programming language constrain your thought process. Java/Pascal is much more constraining than something like Oz/Scheme.
I recently visited a webapp thru HN whose developer wrote it in Sleep. http://sleep.dashnine.org/ :)
http://www.google.com/views?q=java+dead+view%3Atimeline&...
Looks like it has been dead since 1997, and was most dead in 2003, but not by a whole lot.
On a related note, I've been growing in popularity at a similar rate.
This is just like procrastination. You say that it's dead and don't want to use it, "but then what the heck just one last project"
That's in no way the same as it being dead. It's everywhere.
Dead languages are actually good, you can extend them while keeping the core stable and extending them with other flavours (e.g. J2ME, Android, JSP) making them easy be adopted to new uses.
BTW Delphi is the most backward compatibility language that I know,
To put it bluntly: it is a mess. Indentation breaks, if you use different editors. It is terrible not to have a compiler, because we discover so many bugs during runtime. Not to speak of typelessness...
Loop performance of jython is a factor of 50 behind java. If the use of jython taught me one thing it is this: Never use a scripting language for a serious project!!! It is alright for interactive debugging (although its better to write unit tests right from the start).
And - breaking backward compatibility is a serious step towards extinction. Its alright for hackers, but not for projects that build on top of a large and growing codebase.
A nice point in the article is that many (most?) people that like Java started programming at the time it was created. Younger people think it is too clumsy, older people prefer C or C++. I personally started programming with Pascal and C, and hate the way Java downplays the capacity of its users. C#, although inheriting many of the problems in Java, is a much more interesting and inclusive language.
BTW, I haven't looked at python 3 yet. How have they adapted to two pythons on the system?
# "python rocks" Says:
5y ago I switched from Java to C and Python, I’ve never regretted the decision.”
# "Jason" Says:
Congrats… 5y from now you will still be jobless.
"Java is Dead; Long Live the JVM."
Chancellor Palpatine: 'Java' and 'C or C++', Annakin, are pathways to many abilities SOME would consider to be . . . UNNATURAL.
Annakin: Is it possible to learn these skills?
Chancellor Palpatine: NOT from a Jedi.
or, if you choose . . .
Annakin: You . . . KNOW 'Java' and 'C'?
Emperor-Imminent Palpatine: If we wish to understand the FULL nature of the coding universe, we must embrace a . . . a LARGER view of hacking Annakin. Not just the DOGMATIC assertions of the Jedi.
Annakin: <Draws his lightsaber> YOU"RE the hacker everyone's been looking for. You represent 'Java'!
Emperor-Imminent Palpatine: Are you going to kill me?
Annakin: I would certainly like to!
Emperor-Imminent Palpatine: Yeeesssss . . . I can FEEL your anger. It gives you FOCUS!