Re: Jon Paris says that PHP not Easier to Learn than Java

On 2/4/2011 4:35 PM, Jon Paris wrote:

I won't lower myself to re-titling this thread -that was pretty petty.

I had promised myself that even if you mis-quoted me I wouldn't waste my "breath" getting into it - but there are two blatant mis-quotes/misinterpretations in your post that I will respond to if for no other reason than you decided to hijack the thread for your own purposes and misquoted me in doing so.

1) What I _said_ was "I don't know anyone who simplistically states that PHP is easier to learn than Java."

How anyone could read "PHP not Easier to Learn than Java" into that belies belief.

I did that quite on purpose, Jon, because I'm tired of your half-answers. Either PHP is easier or it isn't. You complain that Java is too hard "for you" when it's syntactically exactly the same as the OO PHP. So then, is I assume that OO PHP is too hard for you, too. So what you're promoting is the older legacy style of PHP, and yet you bag on the LDA. I just couldn't let that slide.

2) What I _said_ was "I have and do say that PHP can be easier for many RPG programmers to learn because you can code without having to get totally into OO. I know personally many programmers (myself included) who tried to learn Java but were never able to get comfortable with it. Many of those have subsequently tried pHP and been successful."

I made that as personal a statement of _belief_ as I could. How anyone can twist that around and respond that "You can't program OO PHP but not be able to program Java." again defies comprehension. In PHP I can (and do) code procedurally, but I can (and do) exploit other peoples OO efforts by using their methods and objects without having to fully code my own stuff in OO.

I just wanted you to clearly state that OO PHP is too hard for you. And now you have. Your position is that you can program procedural PHP, not OO PHP. Evidently it has to do with the OO gene.

At the end of the day you have a hate on for PHP - fine. You don't like it and you are good at Java - good for you. I'm apparently not blessed with the OO gene and therefore find coding in a pure OO style difficult to get my head around - my bad. But I have been able to do things with PHP that I struggled with in Java. Perhaps foolishly I like to believe that I'm not the only person in the RPG world who has experienced that problem.

As noted earlier, if your position is that you like PHP because it's a lovely procedural language, then that is consistent with your statement that OO is just too hard for you. And that's when I would contend that EGL is an even better direction since it's a more procedural language than even PHP, and you can take advantage of all the OO stuff Java has to offer and the same way, but that's a different discussion.

I'm frankly just tired of the idea that OO is too hard for RPG programmers (and thus PHP is better) and you are the most prominent person in our community to perpetuate that meme. But there's nothing I can do other than make sure your position is clear: you don't do OO. And given that position, don't try to position PHP - that is procedural PHP, the only type you are comfortable with - as a better language than Java. It's simply not. OO PHP may be roughly equivalent in capability (despite the almost insurmountable hurdle of dynamic typing) to Java, but procedural PHP is little more than a scripting language.

I have never said that Java is a bad language or that one should not try to learn it. I have said that for me PHP is a better fit. And I will continue to say that because IT IS MY OPINION and I am as entitled to one as anyone else.

Rant away all you want - I've said my piece.

I'm not particularly worried about your inability to program OO (as we've established, it's not Java you have a problem with, it's OO), I only care when you either try to generalize that to the average RPG programmer (most of whom I know can handle OO concepts just fine, thank you) or when you start denigrating other legacy techniques.

If you insist on using procedural programming in an OO language, you have very little room to criticize folks who use the LDA.

Just sayin'

Joe