You’re not wrong, it’s still a staple today, but it lost a lot of its shine a while ago. They are mimicking “new” features introduced in other languages, but make a point to preserve retrocompatibility.
I can’t imagine how convoluted the JVM has become in the last 10 years.
C++ fanboys will talk a bunch of shit about Java for this, but c++ has been doing this same shit (and more poorly) pretty much since its inception.
And most of the newer Java stuff is syntactic sugar, so I’m not sure why that commenter is calling out JVM implementations. I’m guessing they don’t know much about the JVM, since you can compile these higher level syntax tricks down into bytecode just like you might compile more verbose source code.
Static analysis of compiled code with javap might be more difficult, but I’m betting the commenter doesn’t know what that is either.
Java is great if you actually want to earn a living.
You’re not wrong, it’s still a staple today, but it lost a lot of its shine a while ago. They are mimicking “new” features introduced in other languages, but make a point to preserve retrocompatibility.
I can’t imagine how convoluted the JVM has become in the last 10 years.
I don’t really see how that is bad…? Java wants to be widely applicable and taking the best features from other languages helps that goal, right?
C++ fanboys will talk a bunch of shit about Java for this, but c++ has been doing this same shit (and more poorly) pretty much since its inception.
And most of the newer Java stuff is syntactic sugar, so I’m not sure why that commenter is calling out JVM implementations. I’m guessing they don’t know much about the JVM, since you can compile these higher level syntax tricks down into bytecode just like you might compile more verbose source code.
Static analysis of compiled code with javap might be more difficult, but I’m betting the commenter doesn’t know what that is either.