 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|
 No, Java doesn't suck W
hich side are you on in the great Java debate? Doubters claim that Java's performance isn't up to snuff. Proponents believe that the Internet-aware programming language is robust enough to begin cutting its teeth in real-world applications. To get to the heart of the matter, the real question (as we so politely framed it in the last installment of this column) is,
Does Java suck?
From where I sit, the answer is a resounding, "No." Clearly, there have been some valid concerns about the performance of Java, which isn't as good as rivals C and C++. However, a rash of recent developments will go a long way toward boosting Java into the major leagues. But don't take my word for it; let's look at the evidence.
Now, add to these important milestones the recent revelation that Sun is folding its "Hot Spot" optimizing compiler into the next version of the JVM. The upshot is a passel of upcoming compilers and Java processors that should do much to narrow the gap between Java and other languages. Setting performance issues aside, there are many other positives about Java. As a former programmer, I have to say I like the language. It's easy to work with and much less cumbersome than C++. Okay, so it's not as straightforward as C. Then again, the tutorials that purport to teach you Java aren't as elegantly written as the 20-year-old Kernighan & Ritchie classic, "The C Programming Language." What this means is that your quest to learn Java is going to have to rely on old-fashioned hard work. (If you're looking for some help, my favorite Java books remain "Core Java," from Prentice-Hall, by Gary Cornell and Cay Horstmann, and "Java in a Nutshell," from O'Reilly, by David Flanagan.) Finally, let's consider the issue of platform independence--a red herring if ever there was one. Sun rode Java to prominence on the promise of "Write Once, Run Anywhere" software; that is, programmers would be able to create single applications that could execute on a PC, Macintosh or Unix system. According to some recent tests, Java apps are indeed multiplatform. That's grea t. But remember that multiplatform operation is important mainly for Java applets--smaller programs that are downloaded over the Internet and executed from inside a Web browser, like Netscape Navigator or Microsoft Internet Explorer. In the real world, developers will optimize their Java application (in contrast to an applet, a Java application is a larger, standalone program) for their target platform. In theory, they'll be able to maintain a single base of Java code that sits off to the side ready to be tuned for any target processor. Then, when they're ready to take their software to market, they will run their program through an ahead-of-time compiler to generate, say, an optimized x86 executable. This target code is no longer multiplatform, but who cares?--it's intended only (in this case) for Intel PCs. This illustrates how the issue of platform independence is getting blown out of proportion. The bottom line is that the era of Java hype is over. Now, it's time for Java religion to yield to reality. So, while some people still see the Java cup as half empty, I see it as half full. And filling up rapidly.
|
| ||||||||||||||||
