programming languages

Rank

Mathematica vs Java

  1. This language is good for scientific computing

    91% 9%
  2. This language excels at symbolic manipulation

    89% 11%
  3. This language is good for numeric computing

    86% 14%
  4. Code written in this language tends to be terse

    85% 15%
  5. The semantics of this language are much different than other languages I know.

    84% 16%
  6. This language has a niche outside of which I would not use it

    84% 16%
  7. I often feel like I am not smart enough to write this language

    84% 16%
  8. I enjoy playing with this language but would never use it for "real code"

    82% 18%
  9. If this language didn't exist, I would have trouble finding a satisfactory replacement

    78% 22%
  10. I find this language easy to prototype in

    77% 23%
  11. This is a high level language

    76% 24%
  12. This language has a niche in which it is great

    75% 25%
  13. This language matches it's problem domain particularly well.

    74% 26%
  14. I still discover new features of this language on a fairly regular basis

    73% 27%
  15. This language is easier to use for it's problem domain by removing unneeded expressiveness (such as not being Turing complete).

    70% 30%
  16. This language has unusual features that I often miss when using other languages

    70% 30%
  17. I often write things in this language with the intent of rewriting them in something else later

    64% 36%
  18. It is too easy to write code in this language that looks like it does one thing but actually does something else

    61% 39%
  19. This language is expressive

    60% 40%
  20. I would use this language as a scripting language embedded inside a larger application

    57% 43%
  21. This language is unusually bad for beginners

    57% 43%
  22. This language is built on a small core of orthogonal features

    57% 43%
  23. This language is best for very small projects

    57% 43%
  24. I find code written in this language very elegant

    56% 44%
  25. This language is likely to be a passing fad

    55% 45%
  26. It is easy to tell at a glance what code in this language does

    53% 47%
  27. This language is very flexible

    52% 48%
  28. This language is large

    52% 48%
  29. This language has a very dogmatic community

    50% 50%
  30. This language is minimal

    50% 50%
  31. This language has an annoying syntax

    50% 50%
  32. This language has many features which feel "tacked on"

    48% 52%
  33. This language is well documented

    48% 52%
  34. This language makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot

    47% 53%
  35. I find it easy to write efficient code in this language

    47% 53%
  36. Learning this language improved my ability as a programmer

    47% 53%
  37. Code written in this language is very readable

    43% 57%
  38. I am reluctant to admit to knowing this language

    42% 58%
  39. I use this language out of choice

    42% 58%
  40. I would like to write more of this language than I currently do

    42% 58%
  41. I am sometimes embarrassed to admit to my peers that I know this language

    42% 58%
  42. This language has well-organized libraries with consistent, carefully thought-out interfaces

    42% 58%
  43. I enjoy using this language

    42% 58%
  44. I would recommend most programmers learn this language, regardless of whether they have a specific need for it

    41% 59%
  45. Code written in this language tends to be very reliable

    41% 59%
  46. This language has a high quality implementation

    40% 60%
  47. Writing code in this language is a lot of work

    40% 60%
  48. This language is good for beginners

    40% 60%
  49. I would use this language for casual scripting

    40% 60%
  50. Learning this language significantly changed how I use other languages.

    39% 61%
  51. This language is likely to have a strong influence on future languages

    39% 61%
  52. This language has a very rigid idea of how things should be done

    39% 61%
  53. This language would be good for teaching children to write software

    38% 62%
  54. This language has a very coherent design

    38% 62%
  55. I rarely have difficulty abstracting patterns I find in my code

    38% 62%
  56. I can imagine this will be a popular language in twenty years time

    38% 62%
  57. This language is well suited for an agile development approach using short iterations.

    38% 62%
  58. If my code in this language successfully compiles, there is a good chance my code is correct.

    37% 63%
  59. I often get angry when writing code in this language

    36% 64%
  60. Developers who primarily use this language often burn out after a few years

    33% 67%
  61. I usually use this language on solo projects

    33% 67%
  62. Code written in this language will usually run in all the major implementations if it runs in one of them.

    33% 67%
  63. The thought that I may still be using this language in twenty years time fills me with dread

    31% 69%
  64. Programs written in this language tend to be efficient

    31% 69%
  65. I use a lot of code written in this language which I really don't want to have to make changes to

    30% 70%
  66. It's unusual for me to discover unfamiliar features

    30% 70%
  67. I regularly use this language

    28% 72%
  68. I learned this language early in my career as a programmer

    28% 72%
  69. When I write code in this language I can be very sure it is correct

    27% 73%
  70. This language has a good community

    27% 73%
  71. I can imagine using this language in my day job

    26% 74%
  72. Libraries in this language tend to be well documented.

    25% 75%
  73. I know this language well

    25% 75%
  74. It is easy to debug programs written in this language when it goes wrong

    25% 75%
  75. Programs written in this language will usually work in future versions of the language

    25% 75%
  76. This language encourages writing reusable code.

    25% 75%
  77. This language has a good library distribution mechanism.

    23% 77%
  78. I usually use this language on projects with many other members

    22% 78%
  79. This language is frequently used for applications it isn't suitable for

    21% 79%
  80. There are many good commercial tools for this language

    21% 79%
  81. This language has a strong static type system

    21% 79%
  82. The resources for learning this language are of high quality

    21% 79%
  83. I would list this language on my resume

    19% 81%
  84. This language has a wide variety of agreed-upon conventions, which are generally adhered to reasonably well, and which increase my productivity

    19% 81%
  85. This language encourages writing code that is easy to maintain.

    19% 81%
  86. There are many good tools for this language

    17% 83%
  87. This language is good for distributed computing

    16% 84%
  88. There is a lot of accidental complexity when writing code in this language

    16% 84%
  89. This language excels at text processing

    15% 85%
  90. When I run into problems my colleagues can provide me with immediate help with this language

    15% 85%
  91. This language excels at concurrency

    15% 85%
  92. This language is likely to be around for a very long time

    14% 86%
  93. This is a low level language

    14% 86%
  94. I know many other people who use this language

    14% 86%
  95. I would use this language for writing programs for an embedded hardware platform

    11% 89%
  96. This language allows me to write programs where I know exactly what they are doing under the hood

    11% 89%
  97. This language is best for very large projects

    9% 91%
  98. This language is suitable for real-time applications

    9% 91%
  99. There are many good open-source tools for this language

    9% 91%
  100. I use many applications written in this language

    8% 92%
  101. Code written in this language tends to be verbose

    7% 93%
  102. I would use this language for mobile applications

    7% 93%
  103. I would use this language to write a command-line app

    6% 94%
  104. I would use this language for writing server programs

    6% 94%
  105. Programs written in this language tend to play well with others

    6% 94%
  106. There is a wide variety of open source code written in this language

    4% 96%
  107. I would use this language for a desktop GUI project

    3% 97%
  108. This is a mainstream language

    2% 98%
  109. I would use this language for a web project

    100%
  110. Third-party libraries are readily available, well-documented, and of high quality

    100%

What's going on here?

The absolute rankings are interesting for large scale comparisons but when you want to know about two specific languages it's much more informative to look at how the two fare when they go directly head to head.

Here are all the statements which we've got enough comparisons between Mathematica and Java to be meaningful and which of the two our users picked.

The order in which we're presenting them is a little arbitrary (sorry), but we've tried to put the things which they're both good at first so as to give you the most interesting picture of it.