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

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36589 > unrolled thread

Javascript replacing Java?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-03 07:24 -0700
    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-03 10:51 -0400
      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Richard Maher <maher_rjSPAMLESS@hotmail.com> - 2017-05-04 05:52 +0800
        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-03 23:14 -0400
          Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-05 14:44 -0700
            Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-05 22:28 -0400
              Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-06 13:25 +0000
                Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 05:14 -0700
                  Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-08 17:58 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 13:12 -0700
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-08 22:23 +0000
              Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-09 13:41 -0700
                Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-14 20:30 -0400
                  Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-15 11:55 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 10:46 -0700
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-15 19:49 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-15 19:08 -0400
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-16 10:43 +0000
                        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-16 19:14 -0400
                          Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-17 00:13 +0000
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 04:58 -0700
                      Re: Javascript replacing Java? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2017-05-16 12:23 +0000
                        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-05-16 10:46 -0400
                          Re: Javascript replacing Java? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-16 19:17 -0400
                            Re: Javascript replacing Java? Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2017-05-22 18:17 -0700
                        Re: Javascript replacing Java? Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 07:51 -0700
                  Re: Javascript replacing Java? a.laforgia@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 10:44 -0700
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2017-05-15 15:07 -0500
                    Re: Javascript replacing Java? lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-05-15 13:30 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#36631

On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:58:42 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> 2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to 
> find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript. The O'Reilly book I 
> eventually ended up with was one of their worst, little more than a 
> recipe book for JavaScript fragments. It had no satisfactory description 
> of the language constructs and syntax. Even comp.lang.javascript was 
> unable to suggest a good book.

books? who reads books anymore?
https://www.w3schools.com/js/default.asp
https://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-javascript

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36632

On Tue, 16 May 2017 04:58:53 -0700, Eric Douglas wrote:

> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:58:42 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> 2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to
>> find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript. The O'Reilly book I
>> eventually ended up with was one of their worst, little more than a
>> recipe book for JavaScript fragments. It had no satisfactory
>> description of the language constructs and syntax. Even
>> comp.lang.javascript was unable to suggest a good book.
> 
> books? who reads books anymore? https://www.w3schools.com/js/default.asp
> https://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-javascript

Its rather difficult to stick bookmarks in a PDF or to see more than half 
a book page of text at a time. Dead tree books don't have either of these 
failings. They also work during power cuts, in wifi notspots and in 
Faraday cages.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36633

On 5/16/2017 8:23 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Tue, 16 May 2017 04:58:53 -0700, Eric Douglas wrote:
> 
>> On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 7:58:42 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>> 2) I learn languages best by reading books but I was utterly unable to
>>> find even a barely adequate book on JavaScript. The O'Reilly book I
>>> eventually ended up with was one of their worst, little more than a
>>> recipe book for JavaScript fragments. It had no satisfactory
>>> description of the language constructs and syntax. Even
>>> comp.lang.javascript was unable to suggest a good book.
>>
>> books? who reads books anymore? https://www.w3schools.com/js/default.asp
>> https://www.codecademy.com/learn/learn-javascript
> 
> Its rather difficult to stick bookmarks in a PDF or to see more than half
> a book page of text at a time. Dead tree books don't have either of these
> failings. They also work during power cuts, in wifi notspots and in
> Faraday cages.

     You can also scribble truly marvelous proofs in the margins,
if they're not too narrow.

-- 
esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
Thirteen hundred forty-five days to go.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36637

On 5/16/2017 10:46 AM, Eric Sosman wrote:
> On 5/16/2017 8:23 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> Its rather difficult to stick bookmarks in a PDF or to see more than half
>> a book page of text at a time. Dead tree books don't have either of these
>> failings. They also work during power cuts, in wifi notspots and in
>> Faraday cages.
>
>     You can also scribble truly marvelous proofs in the margins,
> if they're not too narrow.

Fine.

But don't write that you have found a proof without
writing the actual proof down.

:-)

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36654

On Tue, 16 May 2017 19:17:09 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
wrote:

>On 5/16/2017 10:46 AM, Eric Sosman wrote:
>> On 5/16/2017 8:23 AM, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>> Its rather difficult to stick bookmarks in a PDF or to see more than half
>>> a book page of text at a time. Dead tree books don't have either of these
>>> failings. They also work during power cuts, in wifi notspots and in
>>> Faraday cages.
>>
>>     You can also scribble truly marvelous proofs in the margins,
>> if they're not too narrow.
>
>Fine.
>
>But don't write that you have found a proof without
>writing the actual proof down.
>
>:-)

     Why not?  It provided centuries of entertainment for
mathematicians.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36634

On Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 8:26:46 AM UTC-4, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> Its rather difficult to stick bookmarks in a PDF or to see more than half 
> a book page of text at a time. Dead tree books don't have either of these 
> failings. They also work during power cuts, in wifi notspots and in 
> Faraday cages.

For PDF you'd have to use a special program but you can put in bookmarks.  Acrobat Reader only lets me put in sticky notes.
For web pages you can add bookmarks.
Wifi and Faraday are irrelevant if you can access the data locally or hard wired.
Practically anything electronic can be printed in dead tree format, but the only use I would normally see for printing documentation for a programming language is if you're out of screen space and need to see some code and the documentation at the same time.
I bought a book on SQL management once and found it so hard to read, to actually learn what the commands would be without the computer able to try them out.  They do make electronic devices (kindle, ipad) if you want that documentation off the computer screen.

Some advantages of electronic documentation:
- you already have an electronic device if you're learning about coding by compiling and executing code
- save trees, save money, save space
- outdated documentation can be updated
- instant delivery

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36623

On Monday, 15 May 2017 01:31:04 UTC+1, Arne Vajhøj  wrote:

[...]
> But I must admit that I find it very difficult to see [...]

Of course you do. Cause you don't know JavaScript and you don't know NodeJS.

> 1) whether one has used node.js

If you had, you would know that NodeJS has expanded the realm of JavaScript to server-side applications as well. There are countless modules that allow you to write any type of application using JS. If you knew that, you would compare the server-side usage of JS to the server-side usage of Java. But you can't, cause you don't know JS and you don't know NodeJS.

> The implicit assumption you are making that because a language can do
> a task, then it is as good as any other language for the task is
> fundamental flawed.

Not at all. What is fundamentally flawed is that you assume that JavaScript cannot be used as a replacement of Java although you totally ignore the potential of that language and all the tools that would close the gap between Java and JavaScript.

If you don't know JavaScript, do not express any opinion about it's relationship to Java. It's only logical.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36626

On 5/15/17 12:44 PM, a.laforgia@gmail.com wrote:
> Not at all. What is fundamentally flawed is that you assume that
> JavaScript cannot be used as a replacement of Java although you
> totally ignore the potential of that language and all the tools that
> would close the gap between Java and JavaScript.

JS sucks for building large applications. I say this as someone who has 
built 10-100KLOC-size applications in JS, including in Node.JS. It's not 
statically typed, which makes MLOC-size applications practically 
impossible to maintain, it's got some pretty crappy tooling, it has poor 
support for multithreading.

Also, replacing a language basically never happens. Even languages like 
COBOL and Ada refuse to die.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36627

"Cause [sic] you don't know ..." Reliable indicator of trolling right there. Arne's point made sense, and you have no evidence to justify the _ad hominem_ attack, itself a reliable indicator that the poster lacks logic and evidence to make their point. No one is fooled.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web