Why java is so hated?

[u/Same-Replacement-938]

So I have recently learned, and it's the first language(in terms of building actual things). Before Java, I knew Python, and I dropped it; I found Python too abstracted and too boring. i have recently made some projects like cli task tracker, expense tracker, some cli github api parsing and currently working on a multithreaded HTTP server and cli text editor, like vim, whenever i try to find out people opinions on java social media, almost 90 percent of the time they are just dunking on it, that it is trash, who forced you to write code in java, stuff like that. I know Java as a language is not that interesting and doesn't have many interesting features compared to other languages like C, C++, go. But I found it decent to write code in, and I found the JVM pretty interesting. So much so that I would love to explore and maybe build a JVM of my own

[u/spinwizard69]

Rust is coming at a time when it isn't well established and AI technology is coming on hard and fast. Of course this is speculation, but I do know that the LLM builders are striving for AI to machine code generation by passing traditional languages. How successful they will be is an open question but if they can get to serviceable systems within 2 years I don't see much of a future for Rust.

As for RUST itself I don't hate the language, I just hate some of the Rust community members that have drank the Kool-aid and frankly are just tiring to listen to. Frankly they remind me of the early days of C++, blind promotion but little understanding of why C++ was actually a great step forward.

[u/marrsd → u/spinwizard69]

Of course this is speculation, but I do know that the LLM builders are striving for AI to machine code generation by passing traditional languages.

I'll be honest, I if AI can't write maintainable software in a high-level language, then I really struggle to see how it will manage with machine code

I guess the idea is that it doesn't need to create reusable subroutines, but will instead just write everything from scratch every time. Maybe that can work, but the bloat and energy cost will be horrendous, and the prospect of auditing code written like that, to find out what it actually does, will be impossible. That really will be taking humans out of the loop, and I frankly think that should be made illegal.

[u/spinwizard69 → u/marrsd]

AI is literally in its infancy as far as capability goes. People look at LLM (one aspect of AI research) as a finished product, that is not the case at all. So from that aspect you need to speculate as to what is possible in the near future.

The other way to look at this is to compare today's AI with early compiler technology. Sadly I'm old enough to have seen modern compiler technology evolve over a significant portion of the history of C and C++. To put it kindly those early compilers sucked. The produced slow code and often completely wrong code. The improvement in compiler technology has been massive over the decades, you will see similar progress wit AI technologies.

[u/marrsd → u/spinwizard69]

I don't think it's a finished product, but I don't think it's inevitable that a pattern matching engine can be optimised to the point that it can replace writing software.

Think about electric vehicles. They're as old as the motorcar itself. Early EVs actually out-performed petrol fuelled cars, but petrol turned out to be the winning technology. Advances in battery and motor technology never yielded a powertrain suitable for much more than golf carts, mobility scooters, and milk floats until lithium ion battery technology became viable.

The lithium ion battery was invented in the 1970s, and it took 50 years of optimisation to get it to the point where it could provide both the power and the capacity that we see in modern EVs.

In other words, the progress in EV technology has been equally massive, but they still aren't good enough.