Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #14032

Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think?

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/29/2012 7:03 AM, Tsukino Usagi wrote:
> On 4/25/2012 6:39 AM, BGB wrote:
>> On 4/23/2012 10:24 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2012 10:20:41 +0200, Bernd Nawothnig
>>> <Bernd.Nawothnig@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-04-20, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>>>> These implementation details should better be hidden and invisible
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> most cases. Let the compiler automatically detect and generate
>>>>>> possible optimisations.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you complicate things, the compiler then has to work to
>>>>> decomplicate (optimise). Why not just keep it simple?
>>>>
>>>> My proposal was quite the contrary: simplification of things, i.e.
>>>> removal of unnecessary data types by unifications.
>>>>
>>>> Keep in mind: the compiler is not the programmer!
>>>>
>>>>>> A programming language should be as simple and orthogonal as
>>>>>> possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> One application of keeping it simple would be to use primitives
>>>>> where possible -- since they are simpler than objects -- and only use
>>>>> objects where they are needed.
>>>>
>>>> See above: don't mix up the compiler, the machine, and implementation
>>>> details with the programmer. Things should be simple for the
>>>> *programmer*, not necessarily for the compiler or the machine, even if
>>>> that maybe preferable. But preferable is not necessary ...
>>>
>>> I am not confusing them, but one does have to consider them all.
>>> If a language can not be easily compiled, that creates problems. Even
>>> if the compilation is simply slower, that may discourage use of it.
>>
>> yep...
>>
>> (pardon any exaggeration... this can be taken purely as personal
>> opinion...).
>>
>>
>> programmer considers whether to use C or C++ for something:
>> tries compiling code with a C compiler, kind of slow, but livable (well,
>> my project rebuilds in about 20 seconds);
>> tries compiling code with a C++ compiler, takes a while, programmer
>> wanders off, gets coffee, comes back, compiler is still churning
>> along... (and maybe continues to take an additional 30 minutes).
>>
>> programmer concludes, regarding C++: "no... this just isn't worth it...".
>>
>> OTOH: Java compiles fairly fast...
>> (but, admittedly, Java isn't really perfect either).
>>
>> so, ultimately, the programmer chooses things based on a mixture of what
>> they are most comfortable with, and what annoyances they are inclined to
>> put up with, ...
>>
>>
>> so:
>> the C++ programmer lives with absurdly long build times (and says "but
>> at least I have, features!").
>>
>> the C programmer lives with a world where doing OO stuff/... is
>> generally painful, and thinks "what problem is there which can't be
>> solved with a little pointer arithmetic?" (maybe followed by using an
>> #ifdef to check the CPU type, writing a few bytes into a buffer, and
>> then calling it as if it were a function pointer...), and concluding
>> "all this OO stuff is nothing really beyond syntax sugar over a few
>> structs and function pointers anyways... so why care?...".
>>
>>
>> and the Java programmer lives in a world where writing code in general
>> is painful (and then thinks, "well at least I have this giant class
>> library, just have to find the relevant SomeClassWhichDoesTaskX",
>> nevermind should anyone go through the pain of having to write some
>> actual code to do something...). but, it is all good, "for safety!".
>>
>>
>> say:
>>
>> C:
>> void *p;
>> long long j;
>> int i;
>> ...
>> i=p; //compiler: warning: I don't like the way this looks, but ok...
>> i=j; //compiler: <remains silent>
>>
>> C++:
>> void *p;
>> long long j;
>> int i;
>> ...
>> i=p; //compiler: error: you need to cast this crap...
>> i=j; //compiler: <remains silent>
>>
>> Java:
>> Void p;
>> long j;
>> int i;
>> ...
>> i=j; //compiler: error: OMG WTF!
>> ... (error message spanning several lines)
>> ... i=j;
>> ... (gotta make sure, ^, programer sees this crap)
>> ...
>>
>> so user has to remember to type "i=(int)j;" or they might cut themselves
>> on the sharp edges of numeric precision, and meanwhile "i=(int)p;"
>> doesn't even come close to working (but, to be fair, there is little in
>> the language design to say what the value "should" be, if it were
>> in-fact to work).
>>
>>
>> and maybe some of:
>>
>> C:
>> printf("Have you seen this? %f\n", sin(M_PI));
>>
>> C++:
>> cout << "Have you seen this?" << sin(M_PI) << endl;
>> ( somewhere in history: "hey, have you seen the spiffy new feature, I
>> can make these operators do whatever random crap I want!", someone else:
>> "hard-core yeah! using shift for printing! why don't we make this a
>> standard feature!" ).
>>
>> Java:
>> System.out.println("Have you seen this? " + Math.sin(Math.PI));
>> ("no one will notice...").
>>
>> well, and:
>> C:
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> int main()
>> {
>> printf("yay!\n");
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> C++:
>> #include <iostream>
>> using namespace std;
>> int main()
>> {
>> cout << "yay!\n" << endl;
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> Java:
>> public class MyClass
>> {
>> public static void main(String[] args)
>> {
>> System.out.println("yay!");
>> }
>> }
>>
>> just saying is all...
>>
>>
>> (decided to leave out some other examples here, potentially more likely
>> to create controversy, which isn't really my intent here).
>>
>>
>> or such...
>
> Whats your point?


that there may be relative tradeoffs between using languages, some of 
which may be seen as non-issues by one developer, but as critical 
failings by another (as well as multiple ways in which a given language 
may be percieved by developers using a different language, ...).

compilation speed was one example, but there are many other possibilities.

for example, type-semantics / type-safety, which may be seen as an 
important feature by one developer, and an annoyance or hindrance by 
another (and may even be defined differently for each developer), ...


so, in effect, language perceptions tend to be relative, to some extent, 
and it isn't really possible to design a "one true language" for which 
everyone will be happy, or which necessarily applies equally well to 
every use-case.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2012-04-19 18:27 -0500
  Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-19 20:02 -0400
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 17:31 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-20 15:45 +0200
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-20 15:05 +0000
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-20 19:32 +0200
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-20 20:47 -0700
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-04-19 17:45 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-19 21:22 -0400
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2012-04-19 21:16 -0500
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-04-19 23:11 -0700
  Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-04-19 21:35 -0300
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-19 21:31 -0400
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-19 19:22 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-04-19 23:15 -0700
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-20 07:45 -0700
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-20 08:20 -0700
            Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-20 19:57 -0700
              Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 04:25 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Leif Roar Moldskred <leifm@dimnakorr.com> - 2012-04-21 07:05 -0500
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 07:42 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 12:55 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 13:27 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 13:34 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 14:01 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-21 23:48 +0000
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 17:46 -0700
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-04-20 08:08 -0700
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-20 16:46 +0000
            Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 12:52 -0700
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-20 08:17 -0700
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2012-04-20 09:02 -0700
            Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 12:48 -0700
            Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-04-20 21:08 -0400
              Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-21 01:55 +0000
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 04:28 -0700
  Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-04-19 19:36 -0500
  Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Tsukino Usagi <usagi@tsukino.ca> - 2012-04-20 15:27 +0900
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2012-04-20 07:04 -0300
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Tsukino Usagi <usagi@tsukino.ca> - 2012-04-20 22:17 +0900
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-20 15:59 +0200
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Thufir <hawat.thufir@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 14:21 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-20 19:11 -0400
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Tsukino Usagi <usagi@tsukino.ca> - 2012-04-20 22:16 +0900
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-20 15:55 +0200
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2012-04-20 07:49 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-20 19:19 -0400
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 07:58 -0700
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? rossum <rossum48@coldmail.com> - 2012-04-20 20:08 +0100
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 12:54 -0700
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-20 21:48 +0000
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-20 16:45 -0700
            Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2012-04-21 01:56 +0000
              Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 04:35 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2012-04-20 16:24 -0600
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-20 19:08 -0400
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2012-04-20 18:14 -0500
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-20 19:22 -0400
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-20 20:36 -0400
  Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-04-20 05:33 -0700
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Bernd Nawothnig <Bernd.Nawothnig@t-online.de> - 2012-04-20 20:53 +0200
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-04-20 13:36 -0700
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Bernd Nawothnig <Bernd.Nawothnig@t-online.de> - 2012-04-21 10:20 +0200
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-04-23 10:24 -0700
            Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-24 14:39 -0700
              Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-04-24 15:06 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-24 17:07 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-25 00:48 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-25 08:20 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-25 08:59 -0700
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-25 10:32 -0700
              Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Tsukino Usagi <usagi@tsukino.ca> - 2012-04-29 23:03 +0900
                Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-29 10:28 -0700
      Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 08:55 -0700
        Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-04-21 12:56 -0700
          Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-21 13:41 -0700
  Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Silvio Bierman <silvio@moc.com> - 2012-04-20 16:50 +0200
    Re: no more primitive data types in Java (JDK 10+). What do you think? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-04-20 19:04 -0400

csiph-web