Re: OT: JavaJunkies (Javamonks sorta)

Updated: Gramatical cleanup's and Ant comment at end

This is awkward because I agree with much of what sporty and flyingmoose have said on the topic, but I think the dichotomy of the two languages is best seen at the enterprise level. Perl suffers from lack of enterprise level acceptance for pretty much the same reasons that Java is accepted.

Never the twain shall meet? Possibly, though I was pleased to see that Java 1.5 has finally been released as I believe it will be much more developer friendly.. and besides the regex capability is now much more Perlish.

But on a much more interesting note for PM'ers is the work the JBoss group did to PHP's Post-Nuke. Seems to me a marriage of Perl with J2ee would good advertisement for both languages

While I've seen the Java zealotry that was mentioned in the post I believe it's just simply the "Java is my hammer" effect, as most good developers that I know weigh the tool to the job without predjudice.. ( ok just a little *g* ). The fact is in terms of maturity Java is still young in comparison to Perl or others. This youth explains the type/quality of existing documentation and support. In regards to ..there is no CJAN comment. The fact is that Java builds in the namespace inherently. It is only the limited number of quality contributions that limits it at this point.

Concerning the time required to develop or present Java problems in a fashion more conducive to an algorithmic mind, much of this has to do with the confusion around and in the wasteland of Java IDE's. From what I've seen comming from the developers that have moved into the eclipse IDE I have seen the quality ease of dialoge improving at a fast pace, as much of what use to be just enviornmental issues are more coherently and easily relagated to 'plug-ins'.

(Gotta say though that ant is a poor excuse for a job that is better done by Perl) -just another .02

coreolyn

Comment on Re: OT: JavaJunkies (Javamonks sorta) Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: OT: JavaJunkies (Javamonks sorta) by flyingmoose (Priest) on Feb 05, 2004 at 19:15 UTC
FYI -- I've written a build system that is a Ant/Perl hybrid. Using the ant methods for controlling java compilation, deps, etc, and then using Perl as an overglorified make, installer builder, and so on (because it's faster). That worked really well. If Java wasn't a component, it would be more Perl though. Enterprise solutions = App servers? If so, I don't think we need those. Those are more of a marketing trend. 500-1GB memory behemoths that are very slow, finicky, and notoriously painful to work on. Too many layers of middle-ware, IMHO... I am excited about the Java 1.5 features (and the trend to make it more functional/friendly -- so when I use it I don't get mad) but some platforms don't get good ports anymore (evil SCO, etc) and unfortunatley where I work, we must continue to support those. It would be cool if these syntatic and gramatical features (which are not OS-specific) weren't written into the JVM, but as modules that could be supported under any JVM. Of course, this is a pipe dream. Anyhow, Perl is not my only hammer. C and C++ are also frequent hammers of mine. But honestly, Perl isn't just a hammer. It's a whole tool-case. Java is more like a drinking straw than a hammer, and well... there are few apps I have seen that are written BEST in java. Maybe I can explain it this way -- if a language is good for both high-level and low-level programming then I'll like it. Java is high-level. Assembler is low-level. This is why I stay away from Java and Assembler as much as possible. I want both, and I don't want a language that fights me.	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: OT: JavaJunkies (Javamonks sorta) by coreolyn (Parson) on Feb 05, 2004 at 19:39 UTC
Interesting.. I did the same thing here creating a Perl/Ant build and deploy framework. Especially when it came down to manipulating the descriptors it was the best tool for the job. It's been working like clockwork for the last couple of years I was involved in the zvmOS/linux/WebSphere project testing here.. (Putting Linux/WebSphere on the mainframe). It's not ready quite yet, but I'm thinking if they'd have gone with a 2.6 linux kernel it would have been a winner. This is where utilization of an appserver starts to make sense. Popping Appservers on line (on demand) just by imaging a VM allows all the encapsulation pay off. By virtue of just changing a few parameters you've scaled on (or off) your entire delivery tier. I don't think you could just do that with mod-perl applications without having to dink with a ton of properties to allow inter communication with the newly created Server. coreolyn	[reply]