Name: Anonymous 2017-07-07 20:02
Mental midgets always try to come up with bogus explanations for why Java is bad[1].
This is all bullshit, and a big misdirection. Nobody, besides a few retard undergrads and brainwashed DARPA drones, believed ``symbols'' and ``singly linked lists'' are going to give computers any kind of intelligence. Not even the AI people working on Lisp believed that.
Java is bad because of its effect on static typing. This mental midget considers static typing a ``serious design flaw''[1] of Java but static typing was a requirement of all real programming languages since FORTRAN in the 1950s, and there were only a few opponents: BCPL, LISP, APL, and FORTH. Even C's creators and users appreciate static typing. The terror of Java caused backlashes against both static typing and OOP, by being an incredibly brain-dead design that made even C appear good by comparison. Java associated static typing with stupidity. As the oppressive cult of UNIX fell to the Microsoft empire, a new threat arose. The teaching of Java opened up the possibility for scripting languages to become real languages, fueled by charlatans like Paul Graham and his praise for dynamic typing, creating this new world of brain-damaged code monkeys and script hackers, who, unlike UNIX hackers, do not even have the excuse of efficiency.
[1] http://web.onetel.net.uk/~hibou/Why%20Java%20is%20Not%20My%20Favourite%20Programming%20Language.html
It is my hope, now a somewhat forlorn one, that computers will one day approach human intelligence. For that, a language needs the right features on top of which to build intelligence: symbols (not just variables), singly linked lists, ability to treat code as data and vice versa. Java lacks both symbols and the ability to treat code as data (any more than C can). It has classes for Doubly Linked Lists. (Of course, you can always greenspun your own singly linked lists.)
This is all bullshit, and a big misdirection. Nobody, besides a few retard undergrads and brainwashed DARPA drones, believed ``symbols'' and ``singly linked lists'' are going to give computers any kind of intelligence. Not even the AI people working on Lisp believed that.
Java is bad because of its effect on static typing. This mental midget considers static typing a ``serious design flaw''[1] of Java but static typing was a requirement of all real programming languages since FORTRAN in the 1950s, and there were only a few opponents: BCPL, LISP, APL, and FORTH. Even C's creators and users appreciate static typing. The terror of Java caused backlashes against both static typing and OOP, by being an incredibly brain-dead design that made even C appear good by comparison. Java associated static typing with stupidity. As the oppressive cult of UNIX fell to the Microsoft empire, a new threat arose. The teaching of Java opened up the possibility for scripting languages to become real languages, fueled by charlatans like Paul Graham and his praise for dynamic typing, creating this new world of brain-damaged code monkeys and script hackers, who, unlike UNIX hackers, do not even have the excuse of efficiency.
[1] http://web.onetel.net.uk/~hibou/Why%20Java%20is%20Not%20My%20Favourite%20Programming%20Language.html