[Tutor] ool

[D-Man]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 03:26:34PM -0700, Deirdre Saoirse wrote:
| On Mon, 16 Apr 2001 alan.gauld@bt.com wrote:
| 
| > > ...It's not "completely class-oriented".
| >
| > Amen to that. I have taken to calling Java a class
| > oriented language rather than on object oriented
| > because it relies so heavily on static class functions.
| 
| I don't like Java, but mostly because it's a language designed for
| beginners (ostensibly) that doesn't really seem to encourage good
| programming practices.

I didn't think Java was really designed (s/designed/suited/) for
beginners.  I think a 'beginner' language wouldn't make the beginner
learn how to deal with exceptions to do IO.

I have a friend who recently started studying CS in college.  He has a
bad professor (or so he describes) who is teaching java and awt.  This
is a beginning course.  According to my friend they haven't learned a
whole lot and always struggle through the projects.  The only thing he
really knows about exceptions is that putting "throws Exception" on
the end of 'main' will let the prog compile and run.

| > This annoys my Java programming colleagues enormously
| 
| You mean like my claim that Java is "C++ with training wheels"? :)

:-)


There are a few conveniences Java has over C++, but I don't see a huge
advantage; especially not compared to python.

-D