«

Joost Diepenmaat <> writes:
> Java is vastly more powerful than javascript, but ...

Just to correct myself; this isn't really true if you look at the
languages by themselves. You can definitely make the case that
Javascript is more powerful than java (and I would make that case), but
as far as "client-side" programming goes, java does have an edge, just
because it has a much larger set of library routines which includes
stuff that's just not possible to do in today's browser-based javascript
(sockets, as someone mentioned here, are just one example).

--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/

On Apr 19, 2:38 pm, Joost Diepenmaat <jo...@zeekat.nl> wrote:
>
>
> *gross simplification*:

True, but I don't want to issue giant legal disclaimers every time I
post!

> java was explicitely designed to appeal to C++ and
> C programmers (a large set of the professional application and systems
> programmers at the time), and it was backed by a very large company.
>
> Also, languages are not at all the same, and many languages don't have
> the same "target". Javascript for instance was initially designed to be
> an extension language for the netscape web browser, where IIRC Java was
> designed to be used for embedded systems and application
> programming. Java was certainly not designed from the outset to be one
> of the big server-side languages of the web (the web hardly existed at
> the time).

Yes, I actually did read about the history of Java (the co-author of
one of my old ~1998 JavaSCript books was on the "Oak" team at Sun),
but what I'd meant by my question was, why so many server languages?
Like how there's "only" one "browser language," which is JavaScript
(MS' JScript and VBScript notwithstanding -- I see them as just
"business products" for MS to try to get more market share, etc.).

> Java is vastly more powerful than javascript, but javascript is much
> more light-weight, easier to implement, far more widely supported and
> easier to secure than java applets. And, as I implied above, Java really
> wasn't designed for applets.

So basically ease-of-use is why Java's "disappeared" server-side?
That makes sense to me -- but of course, I'm having difficulty with
the simplest JavaScript! So far everything's been resolved, in time,
but I wish I had a better, quicker mind for this....

> --
> Joost Diepenmaat | blog:http://joost.zeekat.nl/| work:http://zeekat.nl/

On Apr 19, 3:15 pm, Joost Diepenmaat <jo...@zeekat.nl> wrote:
>
>
> Just to correct myself; this isn't really true if you look at the
> languages by themselves. You can definitely make the case that
> Javascript is more powerful than java (and I would make that case),

WHOA!!

Now I never heard that before!!

Not to get into a programmers' rugby scrum over favorite languages
here, but how's JavaScript "more powerful" than Java???

Just a hyperlink or something is fine, thank you....

> but
> as far as "client-side" programming goes, java does have an edge, just
> because it has a much larger set of library routines which includes
> stuff that's just not possible to do in today's browser-based javascript
> (sockets, as someone mentioned here, are just one example).

Okay, I don't even know what a socket is...I'll go look that up....

> --
> Joost Diepenmaat | blog:http://joost.zeekat.nl/| work:http://zeekat.nl/

Prisoner at War <> writes:

> Not to get into a programmers' rugby scrum over favorite languages
> here, but how's JavaScript "more powerful" than Java???

How do you measure "power" of a programming language at all?

There is "computational power", but both are Turing-complete, so that's
moot.

There is "expressive power": How easy do you express what you mean?
I.e., how short, but still readable, can you express the solution
to a problem.
I can't say which one wins here. Closures in Javascript and classes in
Java are both good at this. The greater standard library of Java
increases the expressive power whe dealing with non-trivial
algorithms, by introducing more "primitives", but Java is more verbose
too.

Any other powers?
/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen -
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

Prisoner at War <> writes:

> but what I'd meant by my question was, why so many server languages?
> Like how there's "only" one "browser language," which is JavaScript

Basically because the installed base of browsers decide which features
pages can use. Javascript does the job adequately, so there is no niche
for another page scripting language to start out in. No niche means no
reason to use any other language when Javascript is already there.

On the server, you can pick a technology per solution.

/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen -
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

On Apr 19, 12:10 am, Prisoner at War <prisoner_at_...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
[...]
> ...is Java still a big deal
> in web development? I think JavaScript is all over the place now --
> almost everyone has "rollover" buttons, at least...

Rollovers do not indicate the presence of javascript - CSS has been
used to implement them for years.


--
Rob

Prisoner at War schreef:

<snip>

>> Java is vastly more powerful than javascript, but javascript is much
>> more light-weight, easier to implement, far more widely supported and
>> easier to secure than java applets. And, as I implied above, Java really
>> wasn't designed for applets.
>
> So basically ease-of-use is why Java's "disappeared" server-side?

You mean clientside here I think, right?
Java is still going strong on the server.
And yes, applets are disappearing clientside, probably partly because
JavaScript grew strong in the last years, and partly because JavaScript
is easy to learn compared to Java.
(I must add that 'mastering' JavaScript is another story, but doing
simple things like formvalidation, image manipulation, etc are easy to
learn.)


Regards,
Erwin Moller

> That makes sense to me -- but of course, I'm having difficulty with
> the simplest JavaScript! So far everything's been resolved, in time,
> but I wish I had a better, quicker mind for this....
>
>> --
>> Joost Diepenmaat | blog:http://joost.zeekat.nl/| work:http://zeekat.nl/
>

On Apr 20, 11:18 pm, RobG <rg...@iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
>
> Rollovers do not indicate the presence of javascript - CSS has been
> used to implement them for years.

You're right -- and I only just found out the other day, after I'd
made my post!

Boy, I'm still catching up with, like, 2006 or something....

> --
> Rob

On Apr 20, 10:01 pm, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen <l...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>
> How do you measure "power" of a programming language at all?

I dunno -- I was asking him! My outsider's perspective would judge it
by the scope and depth of what it could do...thus, though you can use
JavaScript to even program an adventure game, it would be nothing like
the kind of game available with, it seems, Python!

> There is "computational power", but both are Turing-complete, so that's
> moot.

"Turing-complete"?? Wow, more stuff to learn...I am eagerly awaiting
my book "How Computer Programming Works"...I hope that it covers such
deep matters, even though the book is full of colorful pictures for a
newbie like me!

> There is "expressive power": How easy do you express what you mean?

Hmmm, true...that's why in that other thread on this NG I thought that
even though document.imageID.src="file.format" is strictly correct
JavaScript, it's much more user-friendly and, now, I guess, more
"expressively powerful" than
document.getElementByID("imageID").src="file.forma t"....

> I.e., how short, but still readable, can you express the solution
> to a problem.
> I can't say which one wins here. Closures in Javascript and classes in
> Java are both good at this. The greater standard library of Java
> increases the expressive power whe dealing with non-trivial
> algorithms, by introducing more "primitives", but Java is more verbose
> too.

Me, as a simple "non-technical" user, I like JavaScript 'cause it's
"invisible"...Java freezes up my browser (maybe it doesn't do this
anymore; I haven't visited any "Java-sites" that I know of lately) for
half a minute or so, and seems to run in little windows on the
page....

> Any other powers?

Keine Ahnung -- was wondering just so myself!

> /L
> --
> Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - l...@hotpop.com
> DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
> 'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'

On Apr 20, 10:06 pm, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen <l...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>
> Basically because the installed base of browsers decide which features
> pages can use. Javascript does the job adequately, so there is no niche
> for another page scripting language to start out in. No niche means no
> reason to use any other language when Javascript is already there.
>
> On the server, you can pick a technology per solution.

Hmm!!

So it's like one language per solution in the server world??

Like using French to order food, but English to program, and Chinese
to curse!!

Okay, I can kind of see using MySQL for database programming (whatever
that is), but there's PHP and Perl and Java and C++ (or C# or C-
whatever) and Python and who knows what else...not sure why a server
language can't be "versatile" and "universal" as opposed to
"specialized" and "optimized for particular problem sets"....

> /L
> --
> Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - l...@hotpop.com
> DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
> 'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'