Here is another great Bruce Eckel find. In particular the conversation with the Java Wonk is great. I've had that conversation (though not as well put on my part) so many times it hurts. Invariably the conversation turns into "I need static typing", "Have you tried [Perl, Python, Ruby].", "No. Those are toy languages. I need static typing.", "Try it once.", "No. I need static typing." What is really underneath is that a smart engineer knows these language aren't toys and can do the job, but they also know that scripting language programmers get paid less.

This is easily the best thing I have read all week:

Of course, Java has long precedence in arrogantly mangling well- accepted meanings for things: one that particularly stuck in my craw was the use of "design pattern" to describe getters and setters. In JDK 1.4 we were told some lame way to use assertions which was a backward justification for them being disabled by default. JDK 1.4 also had to invent its own inferior logging system rather than using the openly created, well-tested and well-liked Log4J. And we've also been told many times about how Java has been as fast or faster than C++, or about how one or another feature is great and flawless. I point to the threads implementation which has had major changes quietly made from version to version with not so much as a peep of apology or admission that "hey, we really screwed up here." Or maybe I was just not on that particular announcement list.

From Bruce Eckel's talk on Java Generics. Finally somebody with a voice beating back the hype machine.

Speaking of which, at lunch I overheard some guy ranting about how a team from a company named after a very large feature of our solar system is always promising but never delivers anything but specs. Love it.

A little 'programmer humour'.

Is just a bad idea.