4 ms·

They already have at least one world class language designer in Guido. They also have the Go language. Point being that if they wanted a competing language to

They already have at least one world class language designer in Guido. They also have the Go language. Point being that if they wanted a competing language to Java, they probably already had the talent to get it done. (Or just, you know, use Mono/C#).

calpaterson 16y ago
Arguably, they already did create a competing language (ie: Android)
joshes 16y ago
This is a very solid point. Having an internally developed language like Go (which is, according to Rob Pike, being used "for real stuff" inside of Google), the creator of Python (one of the most widely used languages in recent years) and the creator of Java (one of the most widely used languages for at least a decade now) under one roof has to be an embarrassment of riches for any group intending to innovate in the programming language space.
- neilk 16y ago
  Nah, that's too many cooks. They all want different things. Guido is interested primarily in usability, and Python is notoriously poor in performance. Rob Pike writes systems languages. With Java, Gosling has written a very enterprise-friendly language, that drags C++ halfway to Lisp.
  - crux_ 16y ago
    Nit: Halfway to somewhere, but that somewhere ain't Lisp. I'm under-rested and under-caffeinated, but the only thing I can think of that I'd call an intentional similarity between the two languages is the fact they're both garbage collected.
    - wtracy 16y ago
      Cobol? :-P
      - crux_ 16y ago
        Smalltalk would be a good non-snarky answer and one with some basis in history, although Smalltalk seems to have been a much stronger influence over the JVM than the Java language.
    - froydnj 16y ago
      FWIW, none other than Guy Steele has cited Java as dragging C++ programmers halfway to Lisp: http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg04045.html http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/m...
      - crux_ 16y ago
        I'd agree with him, given that this statement was about programmers and Java really did open the floodgates for a diversity of programming languages to become accepted, or at least tolerated. The Java language itself, however, is not very close to Lisp at all.
  - Stormbringer 16y ago
    I think that Guido probably has his plate full with the open revolt over the transition to version 3. Javascript is much closer to a halfway point to Lisp than Java. I don't really see Java as being at all similar to Lisp... witness the 3-4 year (possibly longer) debacle trying to get closures into the language. Talk about banging a square rhinoceros into a round hole. Java's point of greatest similarity to C++ is undoubtedly Generics, which has all the syntactic disadvantages of C++ templates, but none of the meta-programming advantages. But one of the ways of seeing that C++ and Java are quite dissimilar is to first grok Java Interfaces, and then read through the smalltalk/C++ version of the GoF book Design Patterns, with a view to how many of the Patterns don't even make sense in Java or are obsolete in Java because of Interfaces.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
- woan 16y ago
  Thought I should point out MS also has quite a concentration of languages folks that were famous before joining MS: Butler Lampson, Erik Meijer, Herb Sutter, Burton Smith, Anders Hejlsberg
  - statictype 16y ago
    +1 for Anders Hejlsberg. He created Turbo Pascal, Delphi and C# - that's 3 very successful languages/development platforms.
    - mihaelamj 16y ago
      He created Turbo Pascal and Delphi when he was young and hungry. C# when he was well-fed and older. Not hungry in any way. Thus the over-engineering and bloat-ware.
  - jeberle 16y ago
    ... and Simon Peyton-Jones (Haskell)
russellperry 16y ago
Add Josh Bloch, Google's Chief Java Architect to that list.
Stormbringer 16y ago
I threw up a little in my mouth at the thought of James Gosling going to Google to work on Mono/C#. That is quite possibly the most retarded piece of speculation I've seen on the internet all year. How on earth you got 18 upvotes I do not know. Maybe Bruno has a spider crawling the net for references and then sicked his elite team of Argnetinian cyber-ninja-commandoes on it.
- billmcneale 16y ago
  Yup, that and saying that Python and Go are well designed languages.
- statictype 16y ago
  Once you're done throwing up please re-read what I wrote. I merely suggested that if Google wanted an alternative to Java they could use c# which is a similar (and probably better) language instead of inventing their own.
  - Stormbringer 16y ago
    Be that as it may I still think you're delusional for suggesting that Google should jump on the Mono bandwagon, since Mono directly benefits their biggest competitor. Moreover, in what way does hiring Gosling suggest that Google are seeking an alternative to Java? Is Gosling a closet C# fancier? I strongly suspect the opposite.
    - tpz 16y ago
      Mono directly benefits their biggest competitor. Mono directly benefits Oracle?
    - statictype 16y ago
      I think you need to re-read the whole thread more carefully. I never suggested that Google needs to adopt a java competitor (and I don't think they do), much less Mono. I was only responding to the hypothetical that someone else raised and said that if Google wanted a java competitor, they could just use C#. I personally can't see why they would want one.

calpaterson 16y ago

Arguably, they already did create a competing language (ie: Android)

joshes 16y ago

This is a very solid point. Having an internally developed language like Go (which is, according to Rob Pike, being used "for real stuff" inside of Google), the creator of Python (one of the most widely used languages in recent years) and the creator of Java (one of the most widely used languages for at least a decade now) under one roof has to be an embarrassment of riches for any group intending to innovate in the programming language space.

neilk 16y ago
Nah, that's too many cooks. They all want different things. Guido is interested primarily in usability, and Python is notoriously poor in performance. Rob Pike writes systems languages. With Java, Gosling has written a very enterprise-friendly language, that drags C++ halfway to Lisp.
- crux_ 16y ago
  Nit: Halfway to somewhere, but that somewhere ain't Lisp. I'm under-rested and under-caffeinated, but the only thing I can think of that I'd call an intentional similarity between the two languages is the fact they're both garbage collected.
  - wtracy 16y ago
    Cobol? :-P
    - crux_ 16y ago
      Smalltalk would be a good non-snarky answer and one with some basis in history, although Smalltalk seems to have been a much stronger influence over the JVM than the Java language.
  - froydnj 16y ago
    FWIW, none other than Guy Steele has cited Java as dragging C++ programmers halfway to Lisp: http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg04045.html http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/m...
    - crux_ 16y ago
      I'd agree with him, given that this statement was about programmers and Java really did open the floodgates for a diversity of programming languages to become accepted, or at least tolerated. The Java language itself, however, is not very close to Lisp at all.
- Stormbringer 16y ago
  I think that Guido probably has his plate full with the open revolt over the transition to version 3. Javascript is much closer to a halfway point to Lisp than Java. I don't really see Java as being at all similar to Lisp... witness the 3-4 year (possibly longer) debacle trying to get closures into the language. Talk about banging a square rhinoceros into a round hole. Java's point of greatest similarity to C++ is undoubtedly Generics, which has all the syntactic disadvantages of C++ templates, but none of the meta-programming advantages. But one of the ways of seeing that C++ and Java are quite dissimilar is to first grok Java Interfaces, and then read through the smalltalk/C++ version of the GoF book Design Patterns, with a view to how many of the Patterns don't even make sense in Java or are obsolete in Java because of Interfaces.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
woan 16y ago
Thought I should point out MS also has quite a concentration of languages folks that were famous before joining MS: Butler Lampson, Erik Meijer, Herb Sutter, Burton Smith, Anders Hejlsberg
- statictype 16y ago
  +1 for Anders Hejlsberg. He created Turbo Pascal, Delphi and C# - that's 3 very successful languages/development platforms.
  - mihaelamj 16y ago
    He created Turbo Pascal and Delphi when he was young and hungry. C# when he was well-fed and older. Not hungry in any way. Thus the over-engineering and bloat-ware.
- jeberle 16y ago
  ... and Simon Peyton-Jones (Haskell)

russellperry 16y ago

Add Josh Bloch, Google's Chief Java Architect to that list.

Stormbringer 16y ago

I threw up a little in my mouth at the thought of James Gosling going to Google to work on Mono/C#. That is quite possibly the most retarded piece of speculation I've seen on the internet all year. How on earth you got 18 upvotes I do not know. Maybe Bruno has a spider crawling the net for references and then sicked his elite team of Argnetinian cyber-ninja-commandoes on it.

billmcneale 16y ago
Yup, that and saying that Python and Go are well designed languages.
statictype 16y ago
Once you're done throwing up please re-read what I wrote. I merely suggested that if Google wanted an alternative to Java they could use c# which is a similar (and probably better) language instead of inventing their own.
- Stormbringer 16y ago
  Be that as it may I still think you're delusional for suggesting that Google should jump on the Mono bandwagon, since Mono directly benefits their biggest competitor. Moreover, in what way does hiring Gosling suggest that Google are seeking an alternative to Java? Is Gosling a closet C# fancier? I strongly suspect the opposite.
  - tpz 16y ago
    Mono directly benefits their biggest competitor. Mono directly benefits Oracle?
  - statictype 16y ago
    I think you need to re-read the whole thread more carefully. I never suggested that Google needs to adopt a java competitor (and I don't think they do), much less Mono. I was only responding to the hypothetical that someone else raised and said that if Google wanted a java competitor, they could just use C#. I personally can't see why they would want one.