 |
|
For the same reasons you should read it.
The first is readability. The first article I turned to in Java Gems: Jewels from Java Report, edited by Dwight Duego, was a comparison of C++ and Java by Robert Martin, whose writing I have admired for a few years now. Martin is the current editor of the C++ Report, and sets out to compare the languages sans the usual language flame wars one encounters on Usenet newsgroups. Martin likes both Java and C++, and points out the weaknesses and strenths of each language from his view as one who enjoys programming in any language.
The second to read this book is that it can show you how to improve your web site. I confess that most of the goings-on on the Web are still a mystery to me, but I do have a web site whence to market software. Anything that will help my customers is therefore A Good Thing(tm). The gem by Lowell Kaplan demonstrates a way to get Java to talk to CGI scripts, albeit in code presented in what looks like 4-pt. type.
A third reason is that I like to know what's going on. The text is current; articles considered for republication appeared between March 1996 and June 1997. Okay, to an engineer this is current; to someone on wherever the bleeding edge is, this is paleontology. But it was interesting to note that there are a few articles dealing with the notion of persistent Java objects. I would hope persistence is a "solved problem" by now?
Finally, Java Gems: Jewels from Java Report is a convenient book. I found that I could jump in anywhere, read an article, and then leave the book until I had some spare time. Every article is supplemented with e-mail addresses and URLs for follow-up, and most of them have a fair amount of Java code to read.
Two cautions: First, because these articles are gems, they are short; the coverage of a topic is brief and to the point. Second, most of the authors are Java True Believers, so set your hype filter to stun before diving in.
-- Peter N. Roth (peteroth@erols.com)
| Readability |
|
| Originality |
|
| Organization |
|
| Accuracy |
|
| Consistency |
|
| Depth |
|
| Timeliness |
|
| Editing |
|
| Design |
|
| Overall Value |
|
Explanation of ERCB rating scale: No stars = unacceptable, 1 Star = marginal, 2 Stars = average, 3 Stars = above average, 4 Stars = exceptional, 5 stars = stellar.