Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available

Home

News: Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available

  1. Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available (56 messages)

    Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available for download! The latest Early Access release of Forte for Java in all its editions, Community, Enterprise, and new Mobile Edition, are now available to members of the Early Access Program.

    get it here@ http://forte.sun.com/eap/.

    Threaded Messages (56)

  2. Sorry forte, but I jump to Eclipse...
    Too bad for Sun, but Forte is just not stable at all. It freezes a lot, and the UI is not very responsive.
    I jump to exclipse... waon!
    The platform is not completed, but Eclipse+Xdoclet, that a excellent combo.
  3. just another IBM-addicted.
    too bad.
  4. Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available[ Go to top ]

    What changes make this worth a 1.0 increase? I glanced through what's new last night and was not impressed. Sounded like they added the already existant wireless dev kit, and some other minor stuff.

    For standard java web applications, and J2EE, why do I want this? I use IDEA as my main IDE, and use Netbeans for some features IDEA doesn't have. (I use Linux as my dev platform) I honestly think I should install it, but I can't tell myself why.

    -Pete
  5. Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available[ Go to top ]

    well there's:
    1)1.4 sdk support
    2) speeded up startup time,
    3)Ant 1.4.1
    4)App Server integration (Weblogic 6.1 sp1, IPlanet, Tomcat 4.0)
    5)Web Services friendly (eh eh)

    this is just some things I got (only few hours since I downloaded it)
  6. Forte for Java 4.0 EA is now available[ Go to top ]

    Herve,

    Check out Intellij. Really great product, and getting better by the minute. I switched from Jbuilder Enterprise 6.0 (about 3 grand I think) to Intellij (only about $400). And, I'll not look back anytime soon.

    Looks like they'll have some really great stuff in their next release too.

    -Newt
  7. Sorry...
    Im just a Java addicted.
    And to use my beloved language, Im looking fo the best( and cheapest) IDE availabled.
    I've been using Forte/Netbeans for 2 years now, but I have to admit that Eclipse offer by far the best Quality/Price ratio.
  8. sorry maybe i made it too heavy. I don't want to set up a holy war ;)
    Points of view anyway.

    Maybe it's just my heart's talking as I started prg in java using NetBeans and still use it as I primary tool over i.e. VAJ.



  9. My installation never passes "Searching for Suitable JDK. Please wait..." step. I wish the installation program was smart enuff to alert a user with what is wrong on the system (that it cant find the JDK) instead of letting that step take forever ...

    For those who use Eclipse: is there an option of saving class files directly to a directory rather than repository and then exporting it later?

    Regards All,


  10. In Eclipse, your source files compile directly to class files. It is nothing like VAJ in that respect, which is a good thing in my opinion.

    As for as Forte vs. Eclipse, Exclipse wins hands down in my opinion if you are looking for a basic IDE. The primary benefit is that it is wicked fast - comparable to a native Windows app. This is because it does not use Swing, but SWT. This is a windowing toolkit developed by IBM (I think).
    Also, it has a great refactoring tool bar and some very nice build editing features. My favorite is being able to highlight a method, hit F3, and jump straight to that methods implementation.

    I am not discounting Forte. It is just a little slow and unstable for my taste. One thing it does have that I really like is it's JSP editing features. It's nice having JSP code completion, including custom tag completion.

    Both are really great products, especially for the money :-)
  11. A bit OT, as I neither like Eclipse (IMO (!!!!) too slow and no "advanced" features; simply too young I guess) nor Forte (too slow, the UI is a nightmare, too many menus, menuitems etc.) all too much, everything I wanted to object to is "(...) that it is wicked fast (...) This is because it does not use Swing but SWT".
    I think Eclipse is very slow, ok, you experience it as fast. BUT: That it is faster because of SWT is a myth, and this is not IMO but easy to see, look at Together, JBuilder, Eclipse;
    Though I may seem focused too much on "detail" here I write this because I think SWT is a major mistake, it limits portabilit (just a bit, ok), but WHY the hell did they (IBM) develop it= I think its just because they wanted to have something "different"... we'll get a new AWT here!!! (I always liked the "I can program GUIs in C++ on Win32", nice we have 20 different libraries - talking about know how reuse)
    They should have invested the resources to make Swing a bit faster, or maybe improve the Eclipse debugger, integrate Enzterprise features etc. instead of splitting up the "Java-UI world".
    Thumbs down for IBM :-(

    "Quidquid id est, timeo Danaos et dona ferentes". This holds very true for IBM I think.

    regards,

    Messi
  12. I agree with the above poster. IBM is making a BIG mistake. I'm not going to touch their UI libs. Java should remain portable. Any attempts by IBM to destroy that should be met with fury. When MS did the same thing, everyone screamed bloody murder. Now IBM is doing it and everyone is going on about how wonderful it is. This is the worst possible thing to happen to Java right now. Just when Swing is getting fast, IBM pulls this. Have you tried the new JDK1.4/Forte combo at java.sun.com? The current Forte (3.0) still loads like a pig, but once up, the UI is fast (with JDK1.4). Fast to the point there is very little difference between that and a native windows app. With Forte 4.0 the speed can only get better. IBM is abandoning swing at the wrong time. Disgusting. I'm going to continue using Netbeans/Forte.
  13. Let me pose a question: If you were building an important app and the "standard" library available for a portion of the task was simply not fast enough to do the job, would you be justified in building your own? I think so. That is what IBM has done with SWT. You can continue to use Swing, the libraries are fully supported. We have a tool that has decided not to use a standard product, what is the problem here? Get real.
  14. I don't buy the line that Swing is not fast enough. With 1.3 it was fast enough...with 1.4 is is even faster. This is just an attempt by IBM to split Java because they hate Sun. I use JBuilder all the time with 1.3 and it's fine. Even faster with 1.4. If IBM and their crew can't figure out how to make Swing go fast like Borland did, it's their fault. Making a new graphics lib is not the anwser.

    The problem is now you are going to start seeing people use Swing less and the new IBM graphics lib more. So much for cross platform Java. Thanks IBM. Does Eclipse run on OS X?
  15. IBM never used Swing for UI in their IDE's. Why would they all over sudden go with Swing this time? Eclipse is an open project, but when IBM started developing WSAD using Eclipse codebase, they incorporated a lot of VAJ framework that does not use Swing anywhere.
  16. <quote>
    They should have invested the resources to make Swing a bit faster,
    </quote>

    Mmmh, you contradict yourself. First you say Swing is good and now you say it's too slow.

    Either way, I disagree with your assessment. I agree that Swing has come of age, as we can see in many of the professional Swing tools these days, but it still suffers from a lot of problems, such as:

    - Still overall slow compared to native apps and SWT

    - Suffers from the AWT legacy. This mixed mode of programming (AWT/Swing) is not optimal (see with X/Xm for example) as it forces you to work around the so-called high-level API when some functionalities are missing and introduces a dual programming model.

    Some examples:

    Who has never been confused about the lightweight/heavyweight distinction?

    Who has never wondered how come the default button hardly ever works with the Windows look and feel?

    How many times does it take you to lay out a panel with a GridBagLayout and realize that the resize behavior is not the one you expected?

    How many people out there have implemented their own class of wizards?

    I could go on and on, but you get the idea. It was time to invent something new, that would address all these points and would also make the typical GUI tasks of developers these days easy, and this solution is SWT + JFace.

    OTI has made a tremendous job and it's getting better every day.

    And we should all be happy about it, because it makes Java that much stronger on the client.

    --
    Cedric


  17. I use CVT as a repository with WSAD(the IBM version of Eclipse) and map the files through the repository to the local file system. Would that help you?
  18. Hmm, Together Control Center is still the god of IDEs. =) You guys ought to get out of the stone age here.
  19. I think not... True, it offers probably the best combination of round-trip, but its editor is truly abysmal, and it's not so useful as a pure UML modeling tool either. And the v. 5.5 brought many new bugs, without fixing old ones, and significantly increased hunger for resources...
  20. Ill take together with its bugs, all simply irritating trivia and not important, over a cheap product like visual cafe any day. Even JBuilder is poor when it comes to features. Almost daily do I use features found ONLY in together for managing my multideveloper project's source code. The metrics and auditing really rock. Further, the concept of having my UML diagram be the actual code is incredible. I havent touched my diagrams in 3 months but I know that should i open one, it will be current and correct. Because the diagram is the code and vice versa.

    The editor isnt the best, but then name a single IDE that has a decent editor. *listens to the silence* Yep. What is more is that on the PRIORITY list at Togethersoft is the integration of VI and Emacs emulation. After those two go in you can just laugh at current IDE tools. The last piece of the puzzle is integration with BES which is comming soon to Together. This will complete the circuit and I cant put away half my ant script and be confident that it will still integrate and deploy hot.

    There isnt a single developer here that would trade TCC on a bet. If you dont have the hardware to run TCC then you have a really crappy purchasing department. Every single one of my devs has a +1gig machine with at least 512 meg of memory and that is the way it should be.

    If you are screwing around with J2EE jumping from tech to tech, then go for the cheaper tools. If you are a professional N-tier developer like me that needs POWER, get TCC. Get your purchasing dept to blow 16k per license on it and love it.

    In my current project, I have 8 people workign for me of various levels from senior to very junior. In the last 6 months Together has saved us probably around 4 man years of work. That is what I call a buy.
  21. Robert, what are you a salesman for Together? I'm sure it's great. I've tried an it's nice. But you act like good system architects can't even do their jobs without TogetherJ. Some of the best architects I know still do everything in text only VI, no UML, no fanciness. Too many unskilled system architects place too much trust in systems like TogetherJ and Rational Development Suite. They never really learned how to get into the guts and write the system out, and now they rely too heavily on overpriced systems like Rational and Together to do it all.

    That's not to say you can't do things just fine with those tools. But I'm glad I learned this stuff before tools like that. I just see too many guys not really understanding what's udner the hood when they use those tools.

    I use Rational Development Suite now for some work, and It's nice, but if I hadn't learned to develop without it, I wouldn't know where to correct the things that Rational doesn't do well. I've seen the same problems with Together.

    As for VI, you can have exact VI emulation in JBuilder (although I don't use it anymore), and I think Intellij too but not sure.

    -Newt
  22. Jason,
    Can't agree with you. Like you I learned about this before the tools came along, so I do know (to some extent) what's going on under the hood. Together is fabulous, the finest toolkit I've ever used. Your "under the hood" analogy is a good one. How much to you know about the thermodynamics of the internal combustion engine, your car's aerodynamics or the software inside its engine management system? Your car is a tool you use. It meets your needs and you DON'T HAVE TO KNOW what's going on under the hood. Together makes it easy to design, develop and deploy Java applications. Using it you learn the underlying technology. Yes, maybe because occasionally it gets someting wrong. That's like a hammer bending the occasional nail.

    Show me an architect still using only VI for everything and I'll show you an inefficient person whose documentation is almost certainly out of kilter with their code, and whose design is not accessible to others. I'm not saying they're not clever, just deluded.

    Are you still knocking nails in with a rock?
  23. <quote>
    How much to you know about the thermodynamics of the internal combustion engine, your car's aerodynamics or the software inside its engine management system? Your car is a tool you use. It meets your needs and you DON'T HAVE TO KNOW what's going on under the hood.
    </quote>

    This is true enough for the driver(user), but the analogy fails when one is talking about the mechanic/engineer(programmer). He/she must know what's going on "under the hood" in order to perform his/her job adequately.

    The notion that programmers don't have to know this stuff is why there are thousands of VB 'programmers' out there who couldn't write code in a text editor to save their lives.

    later,
    Dan
  24. "The notion that programmers don't have to know this stuff is why there are thousands of VB 'programmers' out there who couldn't write code in a text editor to save their lives."

    I always find this kind of attitude hilarious.
    A Java programmer thumbing his nose at a VB programmer is like a double-wide resident clucking at someone who lives in a tent. Great stuff!
  25. "A Java programmer thumbing his nose at a VB programmer is like a double-wide resident clucking at someone who lives in a tent. Great stuff! "

    What gave you the impression that I am a Java Programmer?

    Just wondering,
    Dan
  26. Wild guess.
  27. On Swing performance:

    I have developed a middle size GUI intensive application on Pentium 166 with 64MB of RAM using Swing. It was running just fine. And now customers are using it on pretty weak hardware without any complaints about speed.


    On SWT and Swing architecture:

    The problem that I see with SWT is that it is based on an older architectural model used by frameworks like VCL and WinForms. This model provides pretty easy way to do regular GUI tasks like putting pre-made components on the forms setting up their properties and coding their events. This is obviously enough for simplistic applications but more complex ones require different tasks to be performed.

    Using Swing it is easily possible to do what SWT and other frameworks allow you to do. In addition one can easily do more complicated tasks such as synchronizing multiple views with one model or providing custom drawing and editing. This unfortunately comes at a price but I am ready to pay it instead of making my own code more complicated or designing another indirection layer on top of SWT.


    On politics:

    I do think that it would have been more beneficial for me if IBM would have released through JCP APIs for additional functionality such as XML based GUI composition, presentations and state machines. This APIs could have been based on any GUI framework or just Swing.


    Artem
  28. <quote>
    The problem that I see with SWT is that it is based on an older architectural model used by frameworks like VCL and WinForms. This model provides pretty easy way to do regular GUI tasks like putting pre-made components on the forms setting up their properties and coding their events. This is obviously enough for simplistic applications but more complex ones require different tasks to be performed.
    </quote>

    I am puzzled. Can you elaborate on why the SWT model is simplistic and how Swing addresses these "complex tasks" better?

    --
    Cedric

  29. Cedric

    NOTE: I am providing such scenarios in which there is a significant difference in the ease of implementation between the frameworks. In certain hardcore cases, when the required functionality can not be derived in any way from the existing one, steps for both SWT and Swing will be the same.

    Synchronizing multiple views with one model:
     SWT:
      Create views
      Create model
      Create event handlers that will update model in case of view changes
      Create notification mechanism in the model that will notify views about model changes
      Create even handlers that will update views in case of model changes
      Bind all handlers, views and model together

     Swing:
      Create views
      Create model
      Create model adapters
      Bind all adapters, views and model together


    Providing custom drawing and editing
     SWT:
      Create custom component
      Change painting code to satisfy your drawing and editing needs
      Change event handling code to satisfy your drawing and editing needs

     Swing:
      Take existing component
      Assign existing component or group of them as its painter
      Assign existing component or group of them as its editor

    Artem
  30. <quote>
     Swing:
      Create views
      Create model
      Create model adapters
      Bind all adapters, views and model together
    </quote>

    Still not understanding why you can't do the same in SWT.

    As far as I can tell, the only difference between both toolkits is the way widget parenting is organized in SWT (you need to pass the parent as a parameter in the constructor, as opposed to Swing where this is performed during add()).

    --
    Cedric

  31. Cedric,

    > Still not understanding why you can't do the same in SWT.

    Because SWT does not natively support models. You can surely write your own support for models in SWT but that would be an additional complexity of development.

    Artem
  32. <quote>
    Because SWT does not natively support models. You can surely write your own support for models in SWT but that would be an additional complexity of development.
    </quote>

    The fact that Swing supports "natively" models is a convenience for the authors of Swing, but not really for the real world. I have had to implement countless times adapters to the Swing models, which basically turns the ideal picture:

    <View/Controller> --- <model> --- <real application>

    into

    <View/Controller> --- <Swing model> --- <Application model> --- <real application>

    so I'm still not very convinced, but I guess your mileage can vary.

    --
    Cedric


  33. "Show me an architect still using only VI for everything and I'll show you an inefficient person whose documentation is almost certainly out of kilter with their code, and whose design is not accessible to others. I'm not saying they're not clever, just deluded."

    I agree with your post. There are architects out there that still everything by the seat of their pants. They are either unsuccessful or they have 3 people tops developing the system.

    Most tools are overwrought and overpriced. A good UML tool is essential. The other stuff is mostly fluff.

    Despite what most people want to believe J2EE is not that complicated. Most of the really hard stuff is done for you.
    But a roadmap is essential. That's what UML does well.
  34. "A good UML tool is essential"

    I disagree that a good UML tool is essential. I would agree that a good design is essential. How you get to that design depends on your preference.

    In many cases, a good UML tool is a white board. Sketch out a design on a white board, come up with a consensus, and start implementing it. When you find a limitation with the original design, "go back to the drawing board" and refactor it. This appoach will work fine in many cases and is a lot cheaper than some alternatives :-)

    As for code and documentation being out of sync - I don't see this as a problem because I feel documentation is highly over-valued. Why would I want to document a design that is still evolving. Who are these design documents for? If they are for the developers, the code should reflect the design. If they are for others, I feel you should wait until the design has "stablized" before committing it to paper. Otherwise, what's the point.

    I do agree that you need more that a basic text editor when developing simply for the effeciencies it buys you, such as highlighting, code completion, on-the-fly builds, automated refactoring, debugging, etc. For these things, emacs and vi just don't cut it. However, some of the IDEs that are being discussed here (Eclipse and NetBeans) contain these features and are FREE.

    I have never had much success with round-trip IDEs, but I also have not used one in quite some time. I am sure TCC is a very mature product. However, I cannot justify the cost for what it buys me, and I sure a lot of developers feel the same way.
  35. " always find this kind of attitude hilarious.
    A Java programmer thumbing his nose at a VB programmer is like a double-wide resident clucking at someone who lives in a tent. Great stuff! "

    If you have such a low opinion of java then what the hell are you doing on a java site? Get lost. We dont need trolls here.

    "What gave you the impression that I am a Java Programmer?"

    Ditto and double for you.

    I hate to be harsh, but you two are just trolling amongst others tring to be productive. We need neither your attitude or support. If you dont like java then surf through please.
  36. My apologies to the group, if I sounded like a troll. I am a Java developer, but I have also been a C++ (and a VB) developer in my time.

    In my previous post, I was only pointing out that it takes more than a good IDE to make a good programmer, which seems to be contrary to the opinions of some in this thread.

    Dan
  37. "In my previous post, I was only pointing out that it takes more than a good IDE to make a good programmer, which seems to be contrary to the opinions of some in this thread."

    I'd be very surprised if anyone would disagree with this. I think it was my original post which brought you into this discussion.

    Together is more of an architect's tool than a programmer's IMHO. But - the best tool in the world won't make a good architect out of a bad one.

    There is an old saying

    "There has never been, and there will never be, a programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad programs".

    To take the analogy one step further

    "There has never been, and there will never be, a modelling tool in which it is the least bit difficult to design bad systems".

    I firmly believe though that if you just stick to your text editor, it makes it that much harder to design good systems because people are better at looking at pictures than they are at looking at text.
  38. "I firmly believe though that if you just stick to your text editor, it makes it that much harder to design good systems because people are better at looking at pictures than they are at looking at text."

    I'm with you there. I do a lot of my work from a text editor, but I do use an IDE (Forte, at the moment) to architect my projects.

    My earlier post pointed out what I saw as a logical flaw in your proof, rather than in a dispute over your point. Apologies if that was misunderstood.

    Dan
  39. "The fact is that the industry has been flooeded by stacks of pseudo developers that put Software Engineer on their business card because they can use Visual Basic or another RAD tool. Then, the real devs are called in to clean up the inevitable catastrophic mess. "

    That bit of "trolling" was from you on March 16th.
    Hypocrite.
  40. "That bit of "trolling" was from you on March 16th.
    Hypocrite."

    Ahh, a fight. =) Lovely. Ok, lets talk about my statement. Its completely true of course although taken far out of context. If it stings then you need to look at your own resume, not blame me. So... back to the statement.

    People that can only use a couple RAD tools and call themselves software engineers are a sure problem. Of course this DOESNT mean that real software engineers dont use tools to accomplish their job. Quite the contrary. The difference is that we understand what is going on underneath the model and its impact on the code, system, business model and strategic software plan. Therefore we purchase the tools to pull the crap work off and focus more on concepts and implementation then typing signatures repeatedly and maintaining UML diagrams manually. Get it ? No? I didnt think so. Keep plugging and one day you will.

    The one tool I absolutely refuse to use and forbid all my devs are GUI builders. Because of this, our GUI code is powerful, reflexive and lightning fast. We have a set of reflexive utilities that we wrote to implement powerful guis in extremely short amounts of time.

    Together, not coincidentally, doent have a GUI builder and there are no plans for one.

    As for UML in Together, its mostly standard with a couple of minor embellishments. Additionally, what are you smoking`? You can have class scoped variables in classes, not just interfaces. Sheesh. Lastly, for coding the tool rocks. It does all of the little crap work like putting stars around methods nd reformatting source code to meet coding standards and inserting the skeletons of methods and classes. You have to do the guts yourself. The way it should be. I can, then, analyze the guts and generate a sequence diagram off the actual code.

    Together has a high learning curve. It takes a while to see all of the rich features in it. Once you do, you will never go back. The auditing and mtrics are phenomical. The coding tools are awesome. Once they integrate vi and emacs, the thing wil be God!
  41. A fight you shall have ;-)[ Go to top ]

    I know some very good and very productive developers who use VB. There is a market for that kind of development. Those who use VB (I'm not one of them) are not automatically idiots. Those who use RAD tools are not automatically idiots. Those that use Java are not automatically geniuses. When someone says "blah, blah, and the VB losers blah, blah..." only make themselves look like fools. (I think that's a direct quote from Mr. Brady.)

    "As for UML in Together, its mostly standard with a couple of minor embellishments. Additionally, what are you smoking`? You can have class scoped variables in classes, not just interfaces. Sheesh"

    My original question on this regards the concept of UML->Java->UML (UML to Java and Java to UML). UML and Java are not directly mappable. I wanted to know how this worked.
    For instance, multiple implementation inheritence is certainly modelable in UML but not possible in Java.
    An interface in UML has methods only but in Java an interface can have constants. How does this work?
    It must be that when you model in UML you do so with the target language in mind. No big whoop. I can see how this works going from UML to Java but not necessarily the other way.
  42. A fight you shall have ;-)[ Go to top ]

    Hmm, you seem to have reading comprehension problems. Lets try it once more.

    If you can use RAD tools, that doent make you a software engineer. I can train a monkey to use a rad tool.

    Conversely, if you are already a software engineer, you use the tools that accomplish the job in an efficient and effective manner. VB is neither efficient nor effective. It is a hack built for non programmers to think they are programmers. It runs like a dog, has limited aplicability and if we want to talk about it in a network distributed enterprise system *bang* *sound of someone scrambling back into chair.* Sorry, I was laughing too hard.

    Ive never seen a piece of VB code yet that didnt run like a slow piece of garbage. Hell, Id rather do perl than VB. At least with perl i get a real language that actually performs more then a 49 ford towing a house. VB is crap. Repeat it. Learn it. If you can neither repeat it nor learn it, go write VB and get off a java site.

    "My original question on this regards the concept of UML->Java->UML (UML to Java and Java to UML). UML and Java are not directly mappable."

    You need more education if you believe a single word of that sentence. *shakes head sadly*

    "An interface in UML has methods only but in Java an interface can have constants. How does this work?"

    I dont know that what you say is true and Im not in the mood to look it up. What I do know is that UML was built as an extensible mechanism and you could solve this easily with a class stereotyped as an interface. What you are doing, in my opinion, is nitpicking things that are not important. You remind me of those guys in c++ interviews that would dream up some wacky memory adressing syntax and then ask you to write the same thing in an interview and turn you down if you got it right. One time in one of those, I just stared at the guy, got up, packed up my stuff to their astonishment and said "On second thought I dont want to work for you."

    If you spent half the time you spend nitpicking on learning conceptually oriented software engineering. If you spent the time on learnign the ins and outs of modelling complex tasks in rapidly flexing business world. If you spent that time concentrating on OO concepts instead of popping open VB, dragging and dropping and declaring yourself a software engineer. If you had any idea what Im talking about then we would not be having this discussion.





    Robert Simmons Jr.
    Senior Software Engineer
    Gencyclopedia Lead

    Ingenium Pharmaceuticals AG
    Fraunhoferstraße 13
    82152 Martinsried - Germany
    phone: +49 (0) 89 / 85 65 - 23 80
    fax: +49 (0) 89 / 85 65 - 23 87
    http://www.ingenium-pharmaceuticals.com



  43. A fight you shall have ;-)[ Go to top ]

    robert,
    the new VB in dotNET is a syntactic one to one macro mapping to Java.. C#, VB, J#... they are all micorsoft Java... Java with string switch...

    switch name {
  44. Alrighty then[ Go to top ]

    First, take a Xanex and a deep breath.

    "VB is neither efficient nor effective. "

    For some projects it is both.

    Not all VB code is written for GUI apps. You can write COM comonents in VB. That includes MTS-able components.

    "Ive never seen a piece of VB code yet that didnt run like a slow piece of garbage. "

    Probably true because I'm sure you never have seen VB code at all.

    As languages, feature-for-feature, VB and Java are very similar. Java has inheritence but other than that they are very similar. Neither can claim high performance, either.

    "You need more education if you believe a single word of that sentence. *shakes head sadly* "

    Hmmm. Let's see. Using a UML class diagram I can model multiple implementation inheritence. Java does not offer multiple implementation inheritence. Therefore, there is not a direct mapping. QED.

    "What you are doing, in my opinion, is nitpicking things that are not important."

    I wasn't nitpicking. I was asking.

    Why is it so many Java weenies have such big chips on their shoulders? Get a grip.

    Sartoris Snopes
    Senior Bad Ass
    Frenchman's Bend, Mississippi
    www.badass.com
    1-800-1BAD-ASS
  45. Alrighty then[ Go to top ]

    Sartoris,

    I mostly agree with you. And I think Robert probably needs a little anger management. However, everyone tends to defend technology that they know as gospel.

    As for your comment."Why is it so many Java weenies have such big chips on their shoulders?" that's a bit specious don't you think? How about, "What is it with you Senior Bad Asses? Always such <place nastiness here>." Except, as far as I can tell you are the only Senior Bad Ass that I've met. Don't put a mantle on a group because of Robert. Usually it is the fanatics that make the rest of the group look like morons.

    And Robert, Xanex saounds about right for you right now. You seem to be one of those techies that tells everyone else how bad their technology is just because you have chosen not to use it. One of the reasons I've gotten a lot of good development jobs is because I try very hard not to have the prejudices that you obviously show. Just choose the right tool for the job. And sometimes VB is the right tool, and sometimes not: even if you don't like VB (I don't like VB).

  46. Alrighty then[ Go to top ]

    Sartoris,

    VB and Java are identical now... They are the same in performance as C++... all translate to MSIL in DOTNET....
    Java has been super fast since the hot spot compiler was created.. it beat Visual C++ for a few months on INtel benchmark tests... Java is not slow... Garbage collection is now faster than malloc and free... new and delete?...
    some crap libraries may be slow... the language is just not completely compiled when executed.. it can be completely compiled if you want... VB used to be slow... not anymore...

    Don't you guys even read about what is going on... Micorsoft has copied Java and now all languages on Windows lead to MSIL, a little bit better .class file which can be compiled completely to an .exe ... so VB, Java, C#, and J# are essentially identical languages now... soon dotNET might move to other platforms...

    Java may go the way of word perfect and lotus 1,2,3...
    regardless, the concepts of Java will live on... But VB is identical to Java on the platform it runs on...

     
  47. Alrighty then[ Go to top ]

    Stephen,

    Do you have some docs/ to show all of this about VB/JAVA? I'd like to take a look.

    I have to say my skepticism runs hish. I assume you're talking about VB.NET or whatever it's called. As for VB 6, which I've worked with a lot, it is not even close to the same as Java. Also, I assume you're only discussing performance (at least your pst looks it).

  48. Alrighty then[ Go to top ]

    Jason,

    Here is a URL with some info...

    http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/vb/

    One of DOTNETs features is to provide a common intermediate format for all Microsoft languages and common libraries for all Languages... a kind of .class file that C#, VB, C++, J#, and J++ compile to... Third parties have already got Perl, Cobol, Ada compilers to produce this intermediate format...

    So all Micorsoft languages are very Java like now... one can
    extend base classes in VC++ in VB and in turn extend those classes in C#... I suppose it is unfair of me not to mention that I am talking about the new VB... they all use the same set of libraries too... what is more, they support Java 1.1.4 and there is talk of Java 2.0... you can take Java 1.1.4 code and compile it into the intermediate language and even an executable... you can convert it to c#...

    My hunch is that Microsoft will try to put a VM in Explorer soon which runs the MSIL... if they get away with supporting Java 2.0 it makes thir platform pretty appealing... It kind of gives them the same kind of lock on the client that they obtained when they invented Office...

    Regardless, VB programmers have just become less impotent.. they probably lack the knowledge to code effectively but not the tools... the first VB programmer i met didn't know what a linked list or a tree data structure was... but if you are a psychologist writing a reporting program you don't need to know this...

    Remeber, Micorsoft is tricky.. they are attacking Sun, IBM, Oracle, and Java here... it is a pretty good idea... over the years i have seen microsoft "embrace, extend, and destroy" the leading technology innovators over and over again...

    hey, at least bill gates donated 25 billion to charity... i'm starting to forgive the moron... larry ellison bought a mig jet... (see above)...

    read up on dotNET and J++.. you've got a search engine... don't ask me... i'm a vi guy who's smoked copious quantities of weed... who hates himself because he was an alchie when at MIT and never became a physicist or a mathematician...

    i am a WEAKLING...
  49. <quote>
    If you are screwing around with J2EE jumping from tech to tech, then go for the cheaper tools. If you are a professional N-tier developer like me that needs POWER, get TCC. Get your purchasing dept to blow 16k per license on it and love it.
    </quote>

    Hi Robert,
    There are actually many professional N-tier developers that are quite successful without having to use Together, which to me is the mark of a true professional. Its a fine tool, but to you and your company it seems that money grows on trees. I can't just have my purchasing department go out and buy the licenses - it isn't feasible. So we have to "make do" with other tools - and we are quite successful. We have better places to put the money.

    Cheers
    Ray
  50. "Further, the concept of having my UML diagram be the actual code is incredible. I havent touched my diagrams in 3 months but I know that should i open one, it will be current and correct. Because the diagram is the code and vice versa."

    I'm curious about this. UML != Java. How does this tool
    get around things like multiple implementation inheritence?
    What do you get from an UML interface Java code-wise? It can't be a Java Interface because it can have constants whereas in UML you cannot. Do you not use the full UML class language?
  51. "I'm curious about this. UML != Java."

    Im aware of this. However java can be modeled with uml and most features in UML are available in java. THe only exception being MI which is evil anyway. Together embeds javadoc like comments within the method comments for the source code to model many things in the diagram that are not directly represented by source.

    " How does this tool get around things like multiple implementation inheritence?"

    Im not following you. If you mean, multiple inheritance then I wouldnt know. I have neither the desire nor need for it. If you mean more then one class implementing an interface, it handles it easily.

    "What do you get from an UML interface Java code-wise?"

    Round trip engineering. Rewiring whole stacks of classes with a single drag and drop. Have 50 classes that inherit from class A? Want to make them inherit from class B Instead and have B inherit from A? 5 clicks and 2 drags. With together you can edit from properties panel, tree, diagram or source and the other three immediately reflect the changes in the other. It allows flow based re-engineering and refactoring that happens at warp speed. We wont even talk about auto generated sequence diagrams and vice versa. The list of features is really too long to list. I suggest you download the new 6.0 that is commign out in a couple weeks and give it a spin.

    " It can't be a Java Interface because it can have constants whereas in UML you cannot."

    Rubbish. In UML you certainly can have constants. Class scoped variables that are invariants.

    "Do you not use the full UML class language?"

    Not likely. Never met anyone that does. But id bet I tag about 80% of it.
  52. "Rubbish. In UML you certainly can have constants. Class scoped variables that are invariants."

    Not so. Interfaces in UML have operations only. No constants.

    But you answered my basic question. You design towards your target language. And that, of course, is perfectly fine.
  53. That's one of the problems with Together - they use their own flavor of UML, and while I understand they had to do this because of the simultaneous round-trip (code==model), it is no longer really pure UML -it's their own profile. As long as it adds new modeling constructs, it's ok, but when it tries to enforce Java limitations on a pure conceptual model, I think it's bad.

    I've been asking many times for the ability to turn off the code/model synchronization, in order to get rid of some stupid constraints when working on a pure conceptual model. It's not possible.. :-((

    Regarding the pricing: it is probably too expensive for many teams to use just Together. What, do you expect a 30-people shop to buy even 10 licenses??? You're talking about some 100 K$ here... They should also listen more to the users, fixing some bugs which were there from 4.2 version onwards (and yes, I reported them many times) - but instead they decided to add VB and C# support, reportedly also very buggy.

    I'm not saying it's a bad tool - I love to use it, both for development and for conceptual modeling (see some examples in documents at www.ecimf.org), but I would say it's still far from ideal, especially for the money...
  54. Do those architects who use only VI charge by the hour? If so, they are very expensive!
  55. you must not be experienced with VI. A real VI power user can do more in about 5 minutes than most people can do in an hour with an IDE. I personally am an emacs guy. But the VI guys I work with can do things with a speed that is almost ridiculous.
  56. Vi is very powerful... James Gosling is a good programmer.. He is currently working on Forte because he claims the best IDE is currently Emacs.. which he also wrote... I use UML tools to generate documentation from my code...

    I would like to be able to use TogetherJ to change a class
    heirarchy, as described in 5 minutes, instead of the 10 it takes in VI, but I do not have the patience to deal with the ancillary nonsense...

    Good physicists code in fortran a lot... my phD adviser couldn't use email... he wrote an ADA compiler once... on paper... some grunt typed it in... it didn't need debugging...

    IDEs are an extension of the Visual Basic mindset... they are basically for weaklings... when Gosling finishes with Forte I will use it instead of Vi and grep...

    The father of Genetic algorithms, John Holland... a real man... doesn't use IDEs.. he doesn't use VI... he doesn't use Fortran.. he uses hexadecimal on a texas instruments calculator because he realises what weaklings there are in the world of software... 20 years of PCs, a 10K speedup multiple, and it still takes forever for a computer to start... why... we are pathetic weaklings... other scientists realize computer scientists are a bunch of charletans who should be bean counters, and are inhibiting the development of the science because any joe soap can get 100K to screw aroun with things they have no understanding of... imagine if mathematicians got 100K a year to add 2 digit numbers.. that is what we are... real computer scientists are drowned out in the herd of weaklings adding their numbers with TogetherJ... all software is basically crap... bill gates is a dropout... computer programmers couldn't make it as engineers, let alone physicists, or mathematicians...

    repeat after me.. i am a weakling,,, believe it.. it is true...

    download a free trial of anything.. oracle 9i... use it.. imagine larry ellison flying a mig jet... laugh.. laugh loudly.. imagine pavlov, the designer of the mig jet driving a taxi in NY after his wife left him as a mail order bride for a J2EE guru... wail with laughter... fear the vengance that might come to the global warming polluters... thank god that bill gates is a good philanthropist and maybe some of us will be spared because of his good deeds... repeat... i am a weakling and deserve to be nuked for using togetherJ while the antartic ice cap melts from the energy cnsumed by our monitors...

    i am a weakling... so are you... pavlov is going to kick out weakling arses real hard sometime soon...
  57. ALl we need for Forte/Netbeans is an UML tool capable of drawing all 9 UML diagrams a la Togethersoft user experience. No UML tool comes close.