| There are many programming languages available and | | | | done using it, but the general accepted idea is that it |
| each of them is suitable for another program or | | | | is somehow easier to master than C or C++. |
| application. There are people who have learnt only a | | | | Learning Java programming is not very difficult, |
| few programming languages and who use these | | | | especially if you are familiar with other, more basic, |
| because that is what they know, bust most of the | | | | programming languages and you know for sure what |
| times software programmers will use the | | | | you want to create using it and it has a series of |
| programming language that is required by the | | | | benefits compared to C and C++. First of all, code |
| application they are creating. Java is one of the most | | | | written in this programming language is portable. Code |
| frequently used programming language and writing in | | | | written in C and C++ is not and this makes Java |
| this language is somehow different from the usual | | | | more practical (for example, in C and C++, each |
| Pascal or any C/C++ version but that does not mean | | | | implementation decides the precision and storage |
| that learning the java code is harder than learning | | | | requirements for basic data types. |
| Pascal or C++. Nowadays there are numerous | | | | When you want to move from one system to |
| applications written in Java and its terminology it may | | | | another, this is a source of problems because |
| seem a bit harder in the beginning but anyone can | | | | changes in numeric precision can affect calculations). |
| write in this programming language, that's for sure. | | | | On the other hand, Java defines the size of basic |
| When looking into a new programming language, | | | | types for all implementations (for example, an "int" on |
| most people would like to know if it is easy to learn | | | | one system is the same size and it represents the |
| and work in. If you compare it to C or C++, you | | | | same range of values as on every other given |
| may discover that indeed, using it can be more | | | | system). Find out more at |
| straight forward. This is due to the fact that Java | | | | The cases of programs that make use of floating |
| has far fewer surprises compared to C versions. C | | | | point arithmetic requires a special attention: a program |
| and C++ make use of a lot of peculiarities so learning | | | | that uses floating point calculations can produce |
| and mastering them all can be a daunting task (for | | | | different answers on different systems (in this case, |
| example, temporary variables hang around long after | | | | the degree of difference increases with the number |
| the function that created them has terminated). | | | | of calculations a particular value goes through). But |
| Being more straight forward, Java is a bit easier to | | | | this is a thing specific to all floating point code, not |
| learn and to work with. Java eliminates explicit pointer | | | | only Java code which is also more portable then C or |
| dereferences and memory allocation/reclamation, for | | | | C++ in its object code. It compiles to an object code |
| example, two of the most complicated sources of | | | | for a theoretical machine - in other words, the |
| bugs for C and C++ programmers. Out of range | | | | interpreter emulates that machine. This translates to |
| subscripts are easy to find, as Java is able to do add | | | | the fact that code compiled on one computer will run |
| array bounds checking. Others may argue that it | | | | on other computer machines that has a Java |
| seems easier to work with because there are very | | | | interpreter, but more on this subject you will find out |
| few examples of extremely complicated projects | | | | while learning Java programming. |