Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

ASF's appalling VM vassalage

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-06 22:02

Why are the Apache Software Foundation such Java loving faggots?
Why would you write high-performance scalable software in anything but C? Don't people realize their clusters could be half the size if they took the time to sit down and port the code to a real systems language?

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-06 22:22

Because they want robust software and because developer time is more expensive to developers than CPU time.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-06 22:28

>>1
write scalable software in C
Good luck with that.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-06 22:36

who now owns mySQL and from whom did they buy it from?

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-06 23:52

>>1
People do things in C and people do things in Java.  Deal with it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 1:50

>>2
It's funny that you think writing Java takes less time than writing C.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 2:14

#include <stdio.h>
printf("Hello world!\n");

Now, typing this took me about 10 seconds. But think about all the boilerplate code you'd need to write the same thing in Java. You'd need at least twice as long just to type out public static void main(String[] args) and you don't even have any real code yet!

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 2:43

>>7
You forgot your main function.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 3:41

>>8
It won't segfault before outputting the string, so it's valid. It's the same as when you don't free the memory at the end of the program, since the system already does that for you.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 5:50

It's valid, but unnecessarily clever. A minimal hello world program in C is a lot shorter than a minimal hello world program in Java even when you're being proper.

#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)
{
    puts("Hello world!");
    return 0;
}

versus

public class HelloWorld {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        System.out.println("Hellow world!");
    }
}

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 5:53

>>10
This is a valid point when the only thing you write are hello world programs. Meet the real world.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 5:59

>>11
I have delivered Scalable Hello World Solutions in over twenty languages.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 6:21

>>11
The real world where C is by far the most popular programming language? Or did you have some other one in mind?

Even if C is too ``low-level'' for you, there are countless better options than Java. Perl would seem to be culturally most compatible with Apache.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 7:05

>>13
That's not the point I'm arguing for. Someone in this thread pointed out that developing software in Java is faster than in C, and another /prog/rider presented the "Hello world" as a counterexample. My point was that it was silly.

Also,
(...) there are countless better options than Java. Perl (...)
IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 8:12

>>14
It is a silly counterexample, but it does hold true.
Also: The only downside to Perl is that there are far too many ways to do the same thing.

[code]#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
# print "Hello, world!\n"; # Procedural - don't be so silly!

invoke Hello::World->cast_spell;

package Hello::World;
sub invoke { bless shift, shift; }
sub cast_spell { print "Hello, world!"; }

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 8:13

>>15 [spoiler]Fuck/spoiler]
#!/usr/bin/perl
use strict;
use warnings;
# print "Hello, world!\n"; # Procedural - don't be so silly!

invoke Hello::World->cast_spell;

package Hello::World;
sub invoke { bless shift, shift; }
sub cast_spell { print "Hello, world!"; }

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 8:15

>>16
I am resigning from the BBCODE world.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 8:37

>>17
and so life imitates art

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 9:20

>>14
Your point is wrong. And while Perl is a terrible language, it's considerably better than Java.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 10:51

>>19
java is perl

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 11:37

>>15
Isn't that a good thing, that you have such a robust variety of solutions for the same problem?  And it's Perl; you don't (shouldn't need to) compile it, getting rid of the bloat discrepancies that exist between C++ compilers where some things are not implemented for all compilers.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 14:23

>>19
I have to agree. Perl is terrible the way C++ is terrible: an accident waiting to happen at the hands of a moron. But in Perl's case it's more like begging than waiting, and the moron is probably a smartass in reality: see Acme.

It has some good languages in it. Hell, it has most languages in it. Perl 6 probably only needs a use Haskell; at the top to run Haskell sources.

Name: Anonymous 2010-04-07 15:51

>>22
Perl is terrible the way C++ is terrible: an accident waiting to happen at the hands of a moron.
Sepples is terrible in a lot more ways than that. Of course, so is Perl.

Name: ​​​​​​​​​​ 2010-10-25 17:40

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -