Java and Perl (was Re: [plug] Time & Task Management Tool)

[John Summerfield]

> John Summerfield wrote:
> > 
> > > Does Opera? Mosaic? KDE's explorer?
> > 
> > Don't know about opera, but the platforms where I know it's availal,e
> > users have an alternative, and it's likely to be installed.
> > 
> > Mosaic I thought hat died, but ditto.
> > 
> > KDE? Qui sais. But ditto.
> 
> So, by your reasoning, I should use Netscape or IE over, say, Opera,
> because it has Java support??

If you need to run Java applets, you have choices available to you. One is 
hotjava. Tru it needs a bit of computer power, but I have seen it in use 
at ECU.
 
> 
> Ok, so, I think apart from our application category differences, I think
> you're also after a target audience. By the sounds of it, you are
> writing an app for use, say, internally by a company. Most of what I do
> is public documents and data, and so cannot afford to say "Get a REAL
> browser or go away!" to our target audience.

Your question was along the lines of what java is good for, As always, you 
have to take account of ALL your circumstances in making your choice. 
However, don't write Java off as a useless toy: it's far better at what it 
does that PostgresSQL is at what IT does.


> > > a) Latest lynx has Table support (enough to get minimal row divisions)
> > 
> > Hmm I have 2.8.0. What do I need?
> 
> I think that version has tables support.

It's still not very good.

> 
> > especially for in-house software. Even in cases such as NAB one can
> > reasonably say, "to use this service you must have a java-enabled browser."
> 
> Oh? Why? I should use Windows98, JUST so I can access my bank details??
> Heck, it's easier to revert to the primitive phone banking!

There are java-capable browsers for OS/2, MACOS, most if not all versions 
of Unix, 32-bit Windows.  Who's left out?

> 
> > Besides, we started discussing the merits of Java. They stand alone, but
> > to illustrate them I made some comparison with Perl. For many things where
> > Perl requires add-ons, java doesn't because the capability's built in. I
> > can also find all manner of advantages to perl, but that's not the
> > original question.
> 
> My original request was basically in relation to Perl, as I myself use
> Perl a lot, and know little about Java under the bonnet, so was
> interested if people could justify dumping Perl for Java.


Both have their place. Perl's user interface sucks. Java's specifically 
NOT aimed at OS-dependent stuff. I think Java's networking's better: I 
have just started using Net:FTP. My ftp timed out and I've not got the 
foggiest idea of what to do about it whereas Java would throw some kind of 
exception and I would find that easy to fix.



 
> In fact, my original query was about Java as a SERVER side programming
> language (servlets??) which I have heard mention of occasionally. The
> Client-side vs Server-side is another discussion altogether (and one
> we've tended to head down). As such, Perl CGI vs Java Applet is more a
> design decision, whereas Perl CGI vs Java Servlet is more a technical
> back-end choice, which is what I'm also interested in...

Assuming you configure your web server to use mod_perl for Perl use and/or 
jserv, I expect performance would be comparable for similar application 
designs. jserv uses its own port for communicating with user applications: 
this may lead to some advantages for Java.

Note: I've installed and configured jserv: I've not actually USED it yet.


> 
> > Nobody learns perl in a couple of hours. You might learn a little perl in
> > that, but I have a book containing about 650 pp. Nobody can even READ it
> > in that.
> 
> Enough perl to write effective CGI's, certainly. Basic variable
> handling, string comparisons, language structure, etc, was all I needed
> before I was writing apps. The Tute was, oh, about 5 pages, one on each
> topic?


Learning as much Java is no more difficult. A C++ programmer will have 
little difficulty: it's possible to write programs that compile and run as 
Java and as C++.


> 
> > I turn off javascript and allow java. java was designed to be secure, and
> > has a better history in that respect than its competitors.
> 
> Secure, until Micro$oft did their own version, and cut out many security
> features to save development time. ^_^

I was going to say, "MS hasn't got near my computer," but then I 
remembered it's got NT installed on it.

MS hasn't got near any Java implementation that I use.

> 
> > > > Another advantage of doing the presentation on the target machine: it c
> an
> > > > find the screen resolution and adjust the presentation accordingly.
> > >
> > > Latest browsers can do this. ^_^
> > 
> > To change the layout of a form?
> 
> If you want to.
> 
> > Weren't you arguing for older browsers a while ago?
> 
> No, I'm arguing for backwards compatability. The design of a page (or
> app) such that it will work on ANY browser, old or new, and can use new
> features but doesn't RELY on them.

That rules out Javascript, Java, tables...

> 
> Stats for the Murdoch homepage we have show that 75% of all people use
> the "High Bandwidth" version, and 25% the other. The difference is the
> High has an image map, and uses a Java applet to do scrolling news
> headlines. Considering everyone's first access to the page is to the
> High one, 25% shows quite a number, new browser or old, prefer less
> Java, and less images, for a simpler page.
> 
> Also, total, 66% of people use the Java applet. That means there are 9%
> who DO use the High Bandwidth, but don't have Java-capable browsers.

No no no. Doesn't mean that at all. The fact they don't use a Java-capable 
browser does not mean they don't have one. On OS/2 I prefer to use 
WebExplorer which does not understand Java or Javascript. I use it because 
it's fast. However, I do have Netscape and it understands both Java and 
Javascript.


> 
> This 66% is based on Browser Agent details, and so doesn't take into
> consideration those who have Java turned off.

Perhaps you should survey those whom you think Java-incapable. All OS/2 
Warp users can get an OS/2 version of Netscape that understands java: even 
those OS/2 users who bought the Warp half-pack released in the US in 
November 94 can get it free.

Similarly they can get Java 1.1.7 (I don't know whether 1.2 is out yet) 
for it. Warp 4 ships with Java integrated into the desktop.

btw IBM has announed Visual Age for Java for Linux: it's not actually 
available yet, but OS/2 and NT versions can be downloaded FOC. I expect 
the same will apply to the Linux version.


-- 
Cheers
John Summerfield
http://os2.ami.com.au/os2/ for OS/2 support.
Configuration, networking, combined IBM ftpsites index.