Why not on a UNIX or UNIX-like platform? I mean Java of course, and not VB.Originally Posted by firepages
Personally, I luv Python - great RAD tool... Please let it catch on
Who dragged this up again?
I'm not so sure the boundaries are that clear any more. Depending on your standpoint, you could argue that Java is a form of scripting language; the way it compiles parallels some of the caching mechanisms used in PHP for example.hey gang, new to forums... 2 questions:
1. Why do people keep wanting to compare non-compiling scripting languages to full fledged compilable programming languages? PHP is a scripting language, a very powerfull scripting language but a scripting language non the less. It is intended to make portable apps on web servers, NOT full blown applications for windows or linux. Just my observation here, if you want the power and control necessary to build high end desktop applications use a full blown compilable language.
Guess you're really saying strongly typed vs. loosely typed. For me the reason why people don't do much GUI wise with loosely typed languages is not because their fundamentally flawed but more because practically all widely used loosely typed languages are open source projects which aren't being backed by a company that's developing solid tools for them or smoothing the rough edges required to make complex projects easy for developers.
What's interesting to me is what seems to be a growing "cross over" between loosely typed and strongly typed languages, such as Jython, a Python interpreter written in Java that has had some success as a means to rapidly prototype Java apps. Also PHP 5 is introducing something called "type hinting" where if a function receives an argument of the of wrong type it can throw an exception.
Could be we're heading to some sort of compromise, where you develop your app using loose typing then as the code stabilizes, making it strongly typed.
Like I say - check out XUL - you may well be very surprised - it's the "third way" when thinking about whether you want .NET or Java and it's 100% open source, cross platform etc etc.As for .Net, I think its another great idea from the Monolith, that will eventuall get fubared. I pray Mono works as well as .Net.
When it comes to developing executable programs, I'd choose c++ over php everyday. I think I might not have been too clear. The first part was about the apples and oranges of making compiled executables with a scripting language. Which is what I gather everyone is so trumpted up on PHP.NET about.Originally Posted by M. Johansson
And now my uncalled for opinions:
VB - I had to write GUI code in VB for a large distributed application while at IBM. And I have exactly one thing to say about VB. JUNK!
Yeah, its quick, its easy, and its full of horrible coding practices and shotty functions and memory leaks that could, and often would, fill systems to max capacity.
Java - Great idea, Sun dropped the ball, and now we have to 2 Java's!!!! Yay for Java!
My main complaint about MS and the languages they release (upto .Net) is that they feel it necessary to ALTER the language so you HAVE to use their tools. Which just leads back to MS forcing into paying massive $$ for something that should be accessable by all.
I won't comment on .NET as I don't use .NET and won't use .NET except at the end of my domain names.
Some background: I have been using computers for over 18years, and writing code for over 10. I used to play well with MS, but after doing so system level code projects and having to deal with good 'ol MFC, I have sworn it off. I won't accept a job to code on win32 anymore. I absolutely despise that platform. So I admit I am biased. I see no excuse for MS to continue to put forth all its effort to proprietise EVERYTHING!
Pardon any spelling errors, I am horrid at it I know.
I've heard Java is pretty fast on Solaris, too.Originally Posted by firepages
I absolutely agree. VB is grabualsa. But it was very VERY quick to develop with, and very very easy to learn, so it got popular anyway. Thank god they have fixed all that in VB.NET.Originally Posted by jgreen
Competition is very healthy in this case. The .NET Framework is fantastically well made, and in my opinion much less messier to work with than Java. This can only make Java better.Java - Great idea, Sun dropped the ball, and now we have to 2 Java's!!!! Yay for Java!
No doubt about that. Visual C++ is really annoying to work with for that reason.My main complaint about MS and the languages they release (upto .Net) is that they feel it necessary to ALTER the language so you HAVE to use their tools. Which just leads back to MS forcing into paying massive $$ for something that should be accessable by all.
I belive jgreen is the guilty one! Yarr.Originally Posted by HarryF
Who dislikes strongly typed, compiled languages? And I don't understand the second part of your question.Originally Posted by Mika
and once only , why not ?Could anybody explain me why you dislike the compiled and strong typed languages? Why do try to make forms with the scripting languages? Why, why and one more time why.
I doubt anyone here dislikes compiled apps via C++/JAVA/whatever , that does not mean that it can't be done any other way nor that doing it another way is fundamentally wrong, at least not anymore as the lines between desktop applications and web-based applications are blurring daily.
Just as websites are dynamic so could desktop applications be , ok we can produce upgrades of our compiled applications on a regular basis OR take say , for example , a gtk based app which could evolve on a daily even hourly basis because it is not compiled, if an applications logic, and/or interface is dictated by say an XML configuration file (such as with GTK+Glade or XUL) then is there not a possible benefit to that ? , I would say the benefits are obvious , & also the disadvantages of course (speed , size of the interpreter etc)
worth a try I say.
For web applications, distributed services or anything else that is going to be "intrepreted" by a client application like a web browser, a good solid scripting language is in order.
However that client application that is "interpreting" the service needs to have the power of a solid compilable language behind it. Not a compiled scripting language.
The main difference I see here is when a scripting language gets compiles, it usually means part of that language interpreter was "joined" with the script in some way as to make it a stand alone app. Where as a true compiled program is converted into a true binary executable.
Make more sense? I don't dislike either. I just prefer to use the right tool for the job. Granted I haven't even looked at .Net, but it seems like over kill, to port PHP to the .NET framework. By doing so you just group it with the rest of MS framework and loose the healthy competition. PHP and ASP are head to head. Make a PHP.NET and you'll end up with some sort of *******ized PHP/ASP clone that will undoubtedly go horribly astray. That is if MS remain historically true to their ways.
The beauty of having 30 different languages to write one application in simultateously is lost on me. You (the developer) should learn several strong languages to develop you code it. Having some sort of unified library or basically abstracting the platform is a good idea however. And should be able to ported to different platforms fairly easily.
Again, I don't know squat about .Net. So maybe I misunderstand its purpose. But it all seems like a huge marketing ploy to me.
Sorry if I dragged up a dead horse. But I stumbled across these forums and saw some quality info, then found this thread about PHP.NET, and am left wondering why these people with such good advise are debating, what in my book, is a mute point.
PHP is not MS and shuld in no way become MS. Is my point.
.NETs multi-language capabilities are definetly a flirt with developers, just as most features are. There is, however, a distinct productivity benefit in using the syntax of your choice instead of jumping between several different ones.Originally Posted by jgreen
Three reasons:Originally Posted by jgreen
1. Because the thread starter posted a one of the worst flamebaits ever featured on the SitePoint forums.
2. It was not closed. (We have no rules against trolling)
3. We really like to debate. (This is probably the primary reason)
I agree with you that XUL is not something "ready for enterprise" but I'm just suggesting looking at it to someone who seems to habe an aversion to commercial / closed source technologies.Harry, sorry, but you're willing to dismiss .NET, but support a brand-new, unsupported XUL project? Am I the only one that finds this duplicitous?
Right now plunging into XUL to do anything serious would be a mistake. If you check out one of my remarks here I was talking about poor XUL documentation for example.
I spent a couple of weeks playing with XUL and after being initially amazed got frustrated when I wanted to go something really useful.
What's wierd about this project is everything works (if you're using a recent version of Mozilla) and it's ready to do "real business" with but somewhere along the line, they forgot to tell anyone.
There's exactly 0 tools to help you design XUL apps (aside from the good old text editor) and there's many rough edges, particularily where making it easy for developers it concerned.
Right now you could write an XUL app with does the same as Editize, is lauched from your site, as a WYSIWYG editor and updates the site with SOAP.
It's truly wierd - if Microsoft or Sun owned this they'd be shouting from the rooftops.
I'm doing some coding in the implementation of doing multi-tasking wherein it will execute all processes at once and not waiting for the first process to finsh before it will execute the next process. Is this possbile to php coding if so how.