Re: Why Generics?

>> It was the C++ weenies, definitely.You're entirely
>> correct: The C++ saboteurs have contaminated Java with
>> generics simply and only to make the language unattractive
>> and cause its ultimate demise. The Java people have been
>> suckered into kissing the Bjarne Stone.


"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:_vtee.2703$5o2.1616@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Why C++, in particular? The next version of C# has generics, and the
> current one has auto-boxing, variable-length argument lists, for-loops
over
> collections, etc. Given that Java competes for mindshare with .NET, I
think
> competition with C# is a more likely motive for the 1.5 changes.

Would be the least bit surprised if C++ weenies infected the C# design as
well.

Or it could be that it's not so much as competing for C# mindshare as
competing to get the C++ mindshare. All those people who bought into C++
because it was hyped as the early 90's "it" language and too late realized
what an amazing piece of ATROCIOUS language design it is, and how much
money it is costing them.

Y'know... if I may..this all reminds me of what I see here in my home state
of NH.

In the 80s NH had the 2nd lowest per-capita taxes in the nation and modest
services. In sharp contrast our southern neighbors in Massachussetts had
very nearly the HIGHEST per-capita taxes (source: US Statistical Abstract).

So in the late 80s and 90s, there was a wave of Mass refugees moving to NH
attracted by the lower taxes. And the first things they started to do was
ask for new government services to be added - the sort of things that caused
their MA tax rates to be so high.

It's like they couldn't make the connection between services and taxes.

I think we might see something similar here with Java.

My understanding is that C++ is dying (I wish *I* could be the one to pull
out the feeding tube). Everyone is hearing about the advantages of the
modern languages like C# and Java.

So they're all moving to these other languages and trying to drag their
familiar C++ methods with them not recognizing that it's their ABSENCE that
made Java and C# so attractive.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: why doesnt ruby have generics?
    ... Why would you bind to a type in a language that doesn't really care ... cannot have generics in a language whose variables are typeless as ... Listin Java.) ... In Ruby you can do neither: you cannot cast because variables are ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: Comparing Lisp conditions to Java Exceptions
    ... All the ISO standards in the world will not make the world ... Nothing keeps you from annotating your program with exceptions based on what ... language should adhere to your theory. ... Curiously, although you don't say it, Java has the opposite problem. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: casts
    ... This is why most shit programmers refuse to learn languages including ... C Sharp and Java. ... compiler in a later edition of Visual Basic, ... language for processing data. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: C, really portable?
    ... > Wait, is Java a modern language superior to C, or is it still ... It is a much better OO language than C++, ... It depends what you are doing, Java aims for rigorous portability - the same ... regardless of platform. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Is anybodys favorite computer programming language not included here?
    ... to talk about getting me some paying work writing Java classes. ... and could be copied to a script (as in Java BeanShell or Lisp PROG). ... >> please post a followup saying what language it is, ... Server: "Mother, ...
    (comp.programming)