Greentext

4390 readers

1097 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

Anon is often crazy.
Anon is often depressed.
Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Early_To_Risa@sh.itjust.works

815

Anon tries programming in Java (lemmy.world)

submitted 2 days ago by LiamTheBox@lemmy.world to c/greentext@sh.itjust.works

244 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 52 points 2 days ago (18 children)

C# is nearly the same, but much, much better.

It doesn't (usually) come with the Java culture 8 layers of abstraction. This isn't in the Java language. This isn't in OO. Yet nearly every Java programmer makes things way more complicated than it needs to be.
It's a prettier language. Similar syntax with less bullshit.
It's open source
It's still multiplatform. Modern dotnet / C# works on anything.
Both Visual Studio and Visual Studio code are great IDEs that blow Eclipse out of the water
It's one of the most common business languages.
It's going to be supported forever.

If I could restrict the world of programming to two languages, it'd be C# and Rust. C# for most things and Rust for a lower level language.

[–] PlusMinus@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (11 children)

Nah, C# suffers from a lot of the same shit Java does. Needing everything to be a class is just no longer a good design choice (if it ever was). AOT support is still lacking. I don't get, why it does not have typdefs. I think the solution / project structure is unnecessary and I could probably think of more stuff I dislike about C#. But imho, it still beats Java.

Golang is my choice over C# any time. I strongly prefer how interfaces are handled and I actually like the error handling.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

I strongly prefer how interfaces are handled

It's better than Java, but they still chose to walk headfirst into the same trap that bites Java developers in the ass: associating interface implementations with the struct/class rather than the interface itself.

When you have two interfaces that each require you to implement a function with the same name but a different signature, you're in for a bad time featuring an abomination of wrapper types.

Edit: Clarity.

[–] Willem@kutsuya.dev 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

On that last note, can't you use the explicit interface implementation in C#?

e.g.

public class SampleClass : IControl, ISurface
{
    void IControl.Paint()
    {
        System.Console.WriteLine("IControl.Paint");
    }
    void ISurface.Paint()
    {
        System.Console.WriteLine("ISurface.Paint");
    }
}

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Edit: I misread your comment as "like in C#" and wrote this as an answer to the non-existent question of "can't you use explicit interfaces like in C#"

I haven't kept up with recent Java developments, but with Go, you're out of luck. Interface implementations are completely implicit. You don't even have an implements keyword.

Edit: For Java, a cursory search suggests that they haven't yet added explicit interfaces: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/19111090/does-java-support-explicit-interface-implementation-like-c

[–] Amir@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He mentioned C#, which does let you explicitly choose to implement same-name functions of two interfaces with different code

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

For some reason, my brain inserted a "like" before "C#", and answered the question of "can't you use explicit interfaces like C#."

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (8 replies)

load more comments (14 replies)