Academics slam Java

Levi Pearson levi at
Mon Jan 14 15:51:27 MST 2008

On Jan 14, 2008 2:51 PM, Bryan Sant <bryan.sant at> wrote:

> Careful now.  You're surrounded by scripting language enthusiasts.  If
> they detect that you're advocating type safety and design-by-contract
> even further than the level provided by Java/C++, then you may get
> lynched.

I'll tout the virtues of Lisp and Smalltalk as easily as I do the
virtues of Ada, ML, and Eiffel.  I think current programming languages
are far from perfection, and there are plenty of ways for them to
improve.  I think the future will bring the dynamic/runtime typing
people and the static/compile time people closer together, because
there are plenty of good arguments on both sides that aren't
necessarily incompatible.

Part of the reason the article itself (rather than the fuss about its
mention of Java) resonated with me is that I see very little interest
in programming language research in my classmates.  So many of my BYU
classmates whined and complained about CS330, the programming
languages class, without really trying to learn anything from it.  My
UVSC classmates I've talked to seem a bit more open-minded about
learning languages like ML and Prolog, but I haven't met anyone really
interested in how programming languages differ and how they can be
improved.  Most programming language chatter I overhear is related to
C++, C#, and Java, which, as different as they are, are just a small
space in the possibilities of programming language syntax and


More information about the PLUG mailing list