Java vs CoffeeScript
When comparing Java vs CoffeeScript, the Slant community recommends Java for most people. In the question“What is the best programming language to learn first?” Java is ranked 23rd while CoffeeScript is ranked 65th. The most important reason people chose Java is:
Most Java code follows very standardized coding styles. This means that when you're starting out, there are fewer questions about how you should implement something as the programming styles and patterns are well established and consistent. This consistent style means that it's often easier to follow others' example code, and that it's more likely to meet at least a certain minimum standard of quality. This discipline with consistent stylistic standards also becomes useful later, when collaborating on projects with larger teams.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Consistent programming standards
Most Java code follows very standardized coding styles. This means that when you're starting out, there are fewer questions about how you should implement something as the programming styles and patterns are well established and consistent. This consistent style means that it's often easier to follow others' example code, and that it's more likely to meet at least a certain minimum standard of quality. This discipline with consistent stylistic standards also becomes useful later, when collaborating on projects with larger teams.
Pro Massive amount of libraries and APIs
Java has been around for such a long time that there have been tens of thousands of APIs and libraries written for almost anything you want to do.
Pro Most commonly used language in industry
Java is one of the most popular languages in industry, consistently ranking either first, or occasionally second (behind C or Javascript) in terms of usage. Polls (see sources below) show it to be consistently in high demand, particularly as measured by job board postings. This makes Java a great time investment, as you will be easily able to get a job utilizing your skills, particularly as those Java applications in production now will continue to need maintenance in the future. It also results in great support for tools and plenty of computer science books, example projects and online tutorials.
Pro Fantastic IDEs
Because Java is statically typed, integrated development environments (IDEs) for Java can provide a lot more feedback on errors you will encounter. Java IDEs can give you specific errors in the location where they occur without having to run the code every time. This makes is faster to debug and learn from your mistakes.
IDEs also have extensive auto complete capabilities that can help you learn the programming libraries you are using faster and tell you what functions are available.
Pro Introduces you to object oriented languages
Object Oriented Programming (OOP) is a paradigm that teaches you to split your problem into simpler modules with few connections between them; it's the most common paradigm used in industry. Java is the best choice as an introduction to object oriented languages because, as a statically-typed OOP-only language, it very clearly highlights core OOP principles such as encapsulation, access control, data abstraction, and inheritance.
While a scripting language provides more flexibility and terseness, learning a scripting language first would not instill these fundamental concepts as well, as they tend to obscure details such as how types work, and are less encouraging of an object oriented style.
Pro Best introduction to "C style" languages
The Java syntax is very similar to other C style languages. Learning the fundamentals of Java will port over well to other languages so you can apply what you've leaned to other languages afterwards.
Pro Platform Independent
Because of the Java Virtual Machine, the Java programming language is supported wherever a JVM is installed.
Pro You know what you do, and still simple
Because everything is typed and there is no silent cast or fail, you exactly know what you are manipulating, and there's no magic.
Have you ever watched a beginner struggling with a "couldn't call method x on y" in python or Javascript? These languages don't teach you what proper types are.
Java is one of the simplest languages to learn these basic concepts you find in every programming language.
Pro Compiles to readable Javascript
With CoffeeScript, there's never really a question of what is going on. If you're worried that something went wrong in the compilation process, the output is very human readable and mostly 1 to 1 with the CoffeeScript code, making debugging easier as the code that is being executed by the interpreter can be double checked.
Pro Widely used
CoffeeScript is the most popular of the compile to Javascript languages, so long term support is much less of a worry than with others.
It also means there are many plugins and tools for integrating it into many different build systems, giving it it nearly universal support.
Pro Lightweight syntax
Javascript is a very verbose language so CoffeeScript's goal is to lighten it to make it less tedious.
Various design choices are built around making CoffeeScript more terse with things like optional parenthesis in function calls, cleaner function declarations, no curly braces, and significant white space. Because Javascript can get pretty deeply nested at times, having a lightweight syntax helps with readability.
The result is a language with a minimalistic syntax with lots of syntax sugar.
Pro It's just JavaScript
The golden rule of CoffeeScript is: "It's just JavaScript". The code compiles one-to-one into the equivalent JS, and there is no interpretation at runtime. You can use any existing JavaScript library seamlessly from CoffeeScript (and vice-versa). The compiled output is readable and pretty-printed, passes through JavaScript Lint without warnings, will work in every JavaScript runtime, and tends to run as fast or faster than the equivalent handwritten JavaScript.
Pro Syntax for humans, not compilers.
CoffeeScript adds syntax that is not only more terse than javascript, smoothing over the rough edges, but also enforces a more human readable syntax to the point where a non-programmer can understand some logic.
Many programmers that are not use to coffeescripts syntax will find it foreign if they don't read the single page API, but generally it is quick to understand and although self documenting code is a myth coffeescript is definitely very close.
if hungry then eat food for food in fridge when food isnt poison and it isnt bedtime
Seems a lot more concise and comprehensible to many programmers and most others than the alternative syntax:
var food, i, len;
if (hungry) {
for (i = 0, len = fridge.length; i < len; i++) {
food = fridge[i];
if (food !== poison && it !== bedtime) {
eat(food);
}
}
}
Pro Function syntax is great for callbacks
Passing functions as callbacks is central to how Javascript is written, but the default syntax for functions is very verbose and hard to read. Various CoffeeScript syntax decisions help with ease of writing and reading functions.
The most obvious change is that the function keyword is changed from function
to ->
. Writing out the word function
is very clunky especially when you need to use multiple nested functions.
One of the more opinionated choices of CoffeeScript is the use of significant whitespace, and optional parens around function arguments. While this can be used poorly, it can also be used to great effect with nested functions. For example, a function that takes an object that defines anonymous functions will end in a mess of parens and curly braces:
asyncAction({
success: function(data){ /* handle data */ },
error: function(error){ /* handle errors */ }
});
In CoffeeScript you could rewrite this as:
asyncAction
success: (data) -> /* handle data */
fail: (error) -> /* handle errors */
Other helpful features are automatic returning of the last statement to make short anonymous functions easier so (a, b) -> a+b
would replace function (a, b) { return a+b; }
, as well as binding functions to the current context object with =>
.
Pro Splats
Because Javascript functions can take variable amounts of parameters, it is helpful to be able to use splats to extract an array of arguments in a function.
For example, if you have a function like: (a, b, rest...) ->
any amount of parameters sent to the function after a
, b
will be stored in an array in the variable rest
. You can also put splats at the start or middle of the arguments list, such as (a, middle..., b) ->
.
When calling a function you can use a splat to apply an array as arguments as well.
Pro Everything is an expression
Even for
loops and if
statements. For example, to get mapped array, you don't have to use any Array methods, just the language features:food = ( stuff for stuff in fridge when stuff.isEatable() )
Pro Familiar to Ruby programmers
CoffeeScript was created by a Ruby programmer and a number of syntax features are modelled on Ruby equivalents, so will be familiar to Ruby programmers. For example, implicit returns, i.e. the last variable of each function is implicitly returned, so "return" keyword need not be present.
Pro Extremely easy to document with literate coffeescript
Skip the documentation build, just write documentation with literate CoffeeScript.
CoffeeScript has a literate mode which let's you use markdown (used by almost everything, such as reddit, github, stack exchange, etc) with code indented how you would normally in markdown and simply enables you to run the code.
This enables you to quickly write FORMATTED, custom documentation that's easily displayed with no build step for the documentation.
Pro Source maps allow you to debug code in CoffeeScript
With source maps, you can get the proper location of where an error occurred directly in precompiled code, making it easier to debug without the tedious step of translating the compiled code back to the original code in your head.
Pro Significant whitespace
Having indention-based code blocks is particularly helpful in JavaScript because of its functional callback based nature. In JavaScript you find yourself writing functions within object and passing functions to functions. You can find statements ending with a confusing melange of braces like )}})})
. With significant whitespace, most of the needs for braces go away.
Pro Default choice for Ruby on Rails
Pro Maintainable code
Easy to read and easy to work with structures like list.
Cons
Con Too verbose
- A Hello world needs package, class, static method and the actual
printf
. - Reading a line from input requires instatiating 5 objects in the right order.
- Exceptions are everywhere, particularly since all values are nullable.
- Java has a getter/setter culture, but without native syntax support.
- portable Java code lacks anonymous functions, and continues to lack good support for partial application, compensating instead with verbose design patterns, kludges like anonymous inner classes, or just inline code.
- It is statically typed without type inference, with a culture that promotes long class names.
- Poor support for sum-types and pattern matching leads to overuse of inheritance for dynamic dispatch and chains of nested conditionals
Especially for beginners, this can make reading Java code feel overwhelming; most Java courses tell students to simply copy, paste, and ignore a significant percentage of the code until they've learned enough to understand what it means.
For experienced programmers, this makes Java feel tedious, especially without an IDE, and actively discourages some solutions and some forms of abstraction.
Con Confusing mis-features
Some features in Java can be quite confusing for beginners.
Encapsulation is needlessly obfuscated with a confusing access control model. As an example, the "protected" keyword not only grants access to child classes, but to the entire package. Since small programs are written as one package, it becomes functionally equivalent to "public".
In OOP, everything is supposed to be an object, but, in Java, primitive types such as integers, booleans and characters are not, and must be handled as special cases.
Java continues to lack many high-level features, and, particularly prior to Java 7, compensated by adding confusing Java-only features, such as anonymous subclasses. Some example code is unreadable without knowing a special-case feature, libraries differ in style based on when they were released or what platform they target(e.g., Android vs. Desktop), and some solutions just aren't available on some platforms.
Con Locks you into the static OOP mindset
Overly focuses on class-based OOP to the detriment of programmer freedom or alternative paradigms that are better for various problems. Traps programmers into an always use class-based OOP mindset.
Con Half-baked generics
Type erasure means it doesn't even exist at runtime. The whole generics system is confusing for beginners.
Con Slow and heavy
Too far from the machine hardware.
Con Too much hype and useless complication
I've been developing in Java for 20 years and I love this language, I've never used a better designed one over the last 30+ years. However, starting with version 6, the number of really useful features in each release has steadily decreased. There is now too much marketing in Java's evolution and too few concern about developers' needs (the functionalities of the applications we develop haven't changed and enterprise application architecture is much simpler than 20 years ago). I'm deeply sad to say that today, learning Python is a much wiser choice.
Con Garbage collection may teach bad habits
Java is a garbage collected language and it does not force programmers to think about memory allocation and management for their programs. This is fine most of the time. However, it may cause some difficulties in adjusting to a non-GC language (such as C for example), where memory management needs to be done manually. But if good coding practices and habits are followed, this shouldn't be much of a problem.
Con Long learning curve
Con Worst-of-both-worlds static type system
It's just barely good enough to make decent IDEs, but it's not at the level of Idris or even Haskell. For large enterprise projects, the IDE support is important, but the static typing in Java just gets in the way for the smaller projects beginners would start with.
Python is duck typed and this makes small programs easy to develop quickly, but the price is that you have to write unit tests to avoid breaking larger programs. In contrast, you can be reasonably certain that a program that actually compiles in Idris does what you want, because assertions are built into the powerful type system. Java can't make that claim and still requires unit tests. Java has the worst of both worlds because of its poor static type system.
Con Static typing but no type inference
The type system gets in your way more than it helps. Heavy IDE support is absolutely required for reasonable productivity. This means beginners have to learn not just the language, but eventually a complex, heavyweight IDE too.
Con Lacks modern features
Java evolves very slowly - lambda expressions weren't available until Java 8 (which is not available on Android), and despite getters/setters being a long-time convention, the language still doesn't have native accessor syntax (a la C#'s properties). It's unlikely newer, popular features like list comprehensions or disjoint union types will be available anytime soon. While not strictly required for novice programmers, these make problems more complicated and tedious than they need to be - for example, when a simple local function would do, (portable) Java demands anonymous inner classes, an interface and a class, or worse, no abstraction at all.
Con Anything java can do, C# does better and more elegant.
Since C# came later, it could avoid the blatant mistakes made in Java.
Con Enforces some misguided principles
Java utilizes principles that primarily organize code into "classes" as the central concept, instead of more familiar organizational methods.
Con Checked exceptions
Checked exceptions add significantly to the cognitive load of the beginner. The more rules unrelated to the actual task that you pile onto the beginner, the slower he gets. Exponentially. And for what? Sure, they look good on paper, but checked exceptions are useless in the real world. They don't scale.
When you're calling APIs five levels deep and your method's throws clause balloons to 80 exceptions you might see, it gets kind of ridiculous. So you just say throws Exception
, which defeats the whole feature, but is more pointless boilerplate in an already tediously verbose language.
Or worse, while developing you can't be bothered and just catch{}
and silently swallow them all. Then you forget about it. Now you don't even have exceptions. The cure is worse than the disease!
So the wiser Java programmers will wrap all checked exceptions into a runtime exception, effectively making exceptions unchecked. That's at the cost of more boilerplate, but it's the lesser of evils. Unfortunately, Java doesn't even have macros to do this part for you. Maybe your IDE can write code templates for you, but that doesn't make it any easier to read.
Con Terse syntax can lead to ambiguity
It can sometimes be hard to be sure of what CoffeeScript will compile down to because of the optional parentheses and significant white spacing. Over multiple lines the same statement can be written in many different ways, and it's not always clear what the intended interpretation is.
For example:foo bar and hello world
can compile to either:
foo(bar) && hello(world)
foo(bar && hello(world))
Con Initializing a variable and assigning it are essentially the same thing
Because of how variables are initialized and reassigned in CoffeeScript, it becomes very easy to accidentally overwrite a variable as the codebase increases. As complexity increases, the only way to safely create a variable is by pressing Ctrl + F and by examining the current file to ensure that there's no conflict.
Con Last expression is returned by default
While this is a pro for small functions, it requires self-discipline to check if unnecessary overheads are introduced:
eat_full = ->
for food in fridge
break if full
cook food if food.requires_cooking()
eat food
This will return array of eat
function results. Can be fixed by adding empty return
at the end.