[clug] Why isn't Java popular on the Linux Desktop?

[Sam Couter]

Francis James Whittle <fudje at grapevine.net.au> wrote:
> Also because Java becomes remarkably clunky when you start building
> something the size of a desktop application.  It's better than it used
> to be.

There is no language that isn't clunky when building a GUI, but that's
nothing to do with scale.

> But of course.  Perl (please don't capitalise every letter) is our
> precious whore.  A gem among programming languages that will sell itself
> as easy for any purpose.  Just make sure you're not going to get an STD
> when you use it.

The thought of maintaining perl programs the size of the Java programs I
maintain at work makes me shudder. Talk about write-only. Perl's not
(always) a bad language, but that's one task it completely fails to suit.

When software spends 80% of its life in maintenance mode,
maintainability is obviously one of the driving concerns when selecting
languages, libraries and tools. Perl just doesn't got it. Most languages
don't have suitable tool support, Java and .Net do.

> My personal feeling is that Java adds another layer of indirection where
> it's not necessary, and without advantages such as run-time compilation.

Modern VMs do Just-In-Time compilation, which brings its own set of
advantages.
-- 
Sam Couter         |  mailto:sam at couter.id.au
OpenPGP fingerprint:  A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05  5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/linux/attachments/20090712/4074f21a/attachment.bin