[The E]

Well at least Java doesn't have pointers, which is one of the reasons hacking can be done on C++.  Oh, and don't forget about the operator overloading...haha, nice.  At least Java is cross-platform.

wat.

Java has pointers, they're just called references. Also, the mere existance of pointers in a language is not a security risk in and of itself.

And then there's the M!(r0$h@f+'s iron grip on C and Xbox game development.   

wat^2

Microsoft does not have an "Iron Grip" on C. They don't care about C to the point where the MSVC compiler just doesn't implement the current C standard (because it's a C++ compiler, and while the two languages share many things, they are drifting incrasingly apart), and they don't have any sort of "grip" there either. C/C++ are both governed by international standards committees, and while MS has a voice there, they are far from a dominant one.

And yeah, of course they have tight control over XBox development. That's what happens on Consoles!

Though I do understand your pain of Java always being vulnerable in some way.  Those updates are annoying.  If they can make a better and proper low-level JVM that cannot be vulnerable to all these attacks then we'd all be sitting and laughing and sipping our beers while laughing at all the other languages.  Heck, we'd be able to start a revolution and convert all to the Java platform.  Well, that would require Sun Microsystems to grow a pair both below the belt and above the eyes. 

wat^3

First, you mean Oracle, not Sun.

Second, and this is an important concept you need to understand, there is no way to prove that a program as complex as the Java Virtual Machine is secure. You can validate it against previously discovered vulnerabilities, but you can't ever be sure that no vulnerabilities exist.

[Flipside]

Except for games.  Java isn't very efficient in that regard.

Depends on the type of game to be honest. Certainly something like Minecraft is probably poorly suited to Java in a lot of ways, JOGL isn't a perfect wrapper, and because it's difficult coding decent low-level thread control systems, so most people rely on synchronized methods, which carry their own punishments. However. it's not that Java lacks the power, it's that it lacks the support. Whilst C++ has full coding support for things like OpenGL, Java's strength is also its weakness, it has to rely heavily on community support.

Speed-wise, Java is close, but not quite equal to C++. It's powerful enough to produce pretty high quality stuff were it not for the above problems. There are engines like JavaMonkey for game development, but they are touch and go, and tend to be specialized around a specific game-type.

For 2.5D or 2D games, I would actually say Java is an ideal platform for coding them in, since it's easy to code and modify, and isn't making extreme demands on Javas internals.

[karajorma]

Java references are another example of what I mean about Java being designed to be secure actually.

Misuse of pointers is often a cause of exploits. References don't allow you to get into quite as big a pile of **** as pointers.

Basically, Oracle's mishandling of Java is basically destroying one of the major reasons for using it in the first place!

[Flipside]

If I have a complaint about Java, it's that it sometimes offers too many paths to the same solution, which might seem odd since that is a good thing overall. The reason is that when you are an obsessive revisionist with your code, you can suddenly see another way of doing things later on that might be more efficient on class creation or that maybe an Interface would have been better than inheritance etc, and whilst Java is designed to be easily revised, you can get lost in simply polishing.

I suppose, in the end, that's a problem with all languages, but I suppose that's why system design is such an important part of development these days.

[Bobboau]

none of those paths being the one you wanted.