You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@xml.apache.org by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org> on 2001/03/04 14:57:50 UTC
Mrs. Robinson...
I found this nice article on Salon tonight, and I wanted to share it with my
closest friends :)
<http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/08/bad_java/index.html>
For sure the guy grew up in a bad way :) Just take a look at his name, is he
an hybrid between Homer and Simon & Garfunkel? (Well, I can't say my name is
better - translated it would sound like "Peter Paul Smoking Chickens" - but
his sounds like "Mrs. Robinson's Donuts"...)
I'd give him a big phat "californian" what-EVERRRRRR :) :) :)
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier P. Fumagalli <ma...@betaversion.org>
Re: Mrs. Robinson...
Posted by Pat Martin <sh...@mediaone.net>.
I tried to let this thread expire without getting involved but I simply
can't
stand it anymore.
His articles got me so worked up that I wrote him back personally. Probably
inundated with mail from upset readers, he never responded to me.
First of all, when someone makes a blatant claim that "Language X is not
fast",
I'd like to see it backed up with a benchmark of some kind. Otherwise,
you're
just blowing smoke up my ass and I don't take your claims seriously.
Furthermore,
however fast, I'd argue that Java has yet to realize a fraction of it's
potential. It's a
well designed language currently being judged on the various available
implementations
which I find to be suboptimal.
Currently, most of the optimization effort has been expended in order to
improve Java
at runtime rather than at compile time.
I've dug into the byte code and from what I've seen, current Java compilers
perform
little or no optimization whatsoever. Even minor optimizations such as dead
code
elimination and constant folding are seemingly omitted. For example,
public void foo()
{
for(int i=0;i<100000;i++)
{
}
}
actually gets translated into byte code that increments a counter 100,000
times. Stupid code? Yes! However there's many scenarios where this type of
situation is even more costly and extremely subtle. My point is that there
is lots of room for improvement.
Secondly, he states that "Java is not portable". Hmmm...no concrete
examples
to back it up. I sit and think about my work situation. We have a group
split
between 30 developers with Windows and Unix expertise. Some people develop
on unix, some on NT. Everything is centralized into the unix platform where
it is run and tested. Since it's Java, it shouldn't matter which platform it
runs on.
Re: Mrs. Robinson...
Posted by Glenn Vanderburg <gl...@delphis.com>.
Art Taylor <ta...@yahoo.com> writes:
>
> Yes, Mr. Garfinkel is a bit clueless. Just another journalist
> (principally) who seems to think because he can put something in
> print, it must be true. His article was poorly researched (more than
> 2 years out of date in my opinion) and jumped to conclusions based
> on nothing more than his slanted opinions.
At risk to my own skin, I'll jump to a partial defense of Garfinkel.
I couldn't agree with you more about his Java article. He clearly
made up his mind about Java at a certain point (at least 2 years ago),
ignored potential in favor of (transient) reality, hasn't investigated
the truth about the situation today, and suddenly felt the need to
rant about his outdated impressions in Salon. Plus, he missed the
distinction between personal taste and objective quality. Very
disappointing.
But one of the reasons it's so disappointing is that usually Garfinkel
*has* a great many clues. He is one of the few technology pundits who
do. In fact, where technology policy issues are concerned, or the
social implications of technology, he's often very insightful. His
column in HotWired 3 years ago, "Let My Data Go"
(http://hotwired.lycos.com/synapse/feature/98/01/garfinkel1a_text.html)
is a wonderful manifesto that should be read by anyone interested in
technology policy or good software (or XML, for that matter).
I read Cringely regularly, and Garfinkel slightly less regularly, and
other tech columnists very rarely. He really blew it with his Java
column in Salon, but I'll give him another chance.
--
Glenn Vanderburg
Delphi Consultants, LLC
glv@delphis.com
Re: Mrs. Robinson...
Posted by Art Taylor <ta...@yahoo.com>.
Yes, Mr. Garfinkel is a bit clueless. Just another journalist (principally) who
seems to think because he can put something in print, it must be true. His
article was poorly researched (more than 2 years out of date in my opinion) and
jumped to conclusions based on nothing more than his slanted opinions.
I was one of the 1000+ that sent a comment to him about his first article.
But don't be concerned. I think anyone with technical skills who knows Java
would read the article and see the holes in it.
While I agree that Java has problems, its benefits far outweigh its weaknesses.
I'm not sure what Mr. Garfinkel is proposing - going back to fat client with
MickeySoft, Web development with ASP (BASIC), mainframe programming with IBM
3270 terminals?
Web applications are the future and Java is by far the best solution for
server-side application development to drive the dynamic content for these
applications.
But I don't have to sell the Jakarta people on that point ...
-- Art Taylor
--- Alex Fern�ndez <af...@tid.es> wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> The follow-up is even more ludicrous than the original article. Mr. Garfinkel
> argues that only server-side programming can be successful, while right now
> Java
> is coming out of age and there are good, big applications being written. Just
> look
> at
>
> http://www.togethersoft.com
>
> and
>
> http://www.merant.com/products/pvcs/
>
> for a taste. Both Together/J and Version Manager are excellent applications
> in
> their families, and I should say faster than C++ competitors (Rose is a hog).
>
> And, my favourite, look at Tomcat: a Java application that serves dynamic
> pages as
> fast as Apache serves static content.
>
> His next assertion is that, as an interpreted language, Java does a bad job.
> Full
> on target. Right now, Microsoft is about to change gears with C# and .NET,
> switching to a bad copy of the Java Virtual Machine that interprets even
> Microsoft
> MFCs.
>
> His programming skills may be the root of his lack of understanding: read the
> following paragraph:
>
> > Leo Kuznetsov of Alameda, Calif., sent me an interesting
> > example of the inherent inefficiencies of Java. Consider the
> > case, he wrote, of appending the letters "abc" to the end of a
> > string. In C++ concatenation is pretty simple -- a buffer gets
> > reallocated and three characters get appended to the end of the
> > string. But in Java, three StringBuffer objects and one new
> > String object need to be created.
> >
> It would be great if someone explained this guy the difference between
> "mutable"
> and "immutable" objects. No great innovation here: NeXT has used immutable
> strings
> since the early '90s, with great success.
>
> As one reader points out: "Your article is clear, concise, accurate and two
> years
> out of date".
>
> Un saludo,
>
> Alex.
>
> "Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote:
>
> > "Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
> > >
> > > I found this nice article on Salon tonight, and I wanted to share it with
> my
> > > closest friends :)
> > >
> > > <http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/08/bad_java/index.html>
> > >
> > > For sure the guy grew up in a bad way :) Just take a look at his name, is
> he
> > > an hybrid between Homer and Simon & Garfunkel? (Well, I can't say my name
> is
> > > better - translated it would sound like "Peter Paul Smoking Chickens" -
> but
> > > his sounds like "Mrs. Robinson's Donuts"...)
> > >
> > > I'd give him a big phat "californian" what-EVERRRRRR :) :) :)
> >
> > He wrote a follow-up because a few people gave him a 'what-EVERRRRR'...
> >
> > http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/18/java_response/index.html
> >
> > geir
> >
> > (And if "californian", wouldn't that be 'what-EV- hey? what happened
> > to the lights? ' )
> >
> > --
> > Geir Magnusson Jr. geirm@optonline.com
> > Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
Re: Mrs. Robinson...
Posted by "Pier P. Fumagalli" <pi...@betaversion.org>.
Alex Fernández <af...@tid.es> wrote:
>
> And, my favourite, look at Tomcat: a Java application that serves dynamic
> pages as fast as Apache serves static content.
Well, wouldn't be _so_ sure about that... But working on it :) :) :)
Pier
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pier Fumagalli <http://www.betaversion.org/> <ma...@betaversion.org>
Re: Mrs. Robinson...
Posted by Alex Fernández <af...@tid.es>.
Hi folks.
The follow-up is even more ludicrous than the original article. Mr. Garfinkel
argues that only server-side programming can be successful, while right now Java
is coming out of age and there are good, big applications being written. Just look
at
http://www.togethersoft.com
and
http://www.merant.com/products/pvcs/
for a taste. Both Together/J and Version Manager are excellent applications in
their families, and I should say faster than C++ competitors (Rose is a hog).
And, my favourite, look at Tomcat: a Java application that serves dynamic pages as
fast as Apache serves static content.
His next assertion is that, as an interpreted language, Java does a bad job. Full
on target. Right now, Microsoft is about to change gears with C# and .NET,
switching to a bad copy of the Java Virtual Machine that interprets even Microsoft
MFCs.
His programming skills may be the root of his lack of understanding: read the
following paragraph:
> Leo Kuznetsov of Alameda, Calif., sent me an interesting
> example of the inherent inefficiencies of Java. Consider the
> case, he wrote, of appending the letters "abc" to the end of a
> string. In C++ concatenation is pretty simple -- a buffer gets
> reallocated and three characters get appended to the end of the
> string. But in Java, three StringBuffer objects and one new
> String object need to be created.
>
It would be great if someone explained this guy the difference between "mutable"
and "immutable" objects. No great innovation here: NeXT has used immutable strings
since the early '90s, with great success.
As one reader points out: "Your article is clear, concise, accurate and two years
out of date".
Un saludo,
Alex.
"Geir Magnusson Jr." wrote:
> "Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
> >
> > I found this nice article on Salon tonight, and I wanted to share it with my
> > closest friends :)
> >
> > <http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/08/bad_java/index.html>
> >
> > For sure the guy grew up in a bad way :) Just take a look at his name, is he
> > an hybrid between Homer and Simon & Garfunkel? (Well, I can't say my name is
> > better - translated it would sound like "Peter Paul Smoking Chickens" - but
> > his sounds like "Mrs. Robinson's Donuts"...)
> >
> > I'd give him a big phat "californian" what-EVERRRRRR :) :) :)
>
> He wrote a follow-up because a few people gave him a 'what-EVERRRRR'...
>
> http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/18/java_response/index.html
>
> geir
>
> (And if "californian", wouldn't that be 'what-EV- hey? what happened
> to the lights? ' )
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr. geirm@optonline.com
> Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@jakarta.apache.org
Re: Mrs. Robinson...
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@optonline.net>.
"Pier P. Fumagalli" wrote:
>
> I found this nice article on Salon tonight, and I wanted to share it with my
> closest friends :)
>
> <http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/08/bad_java/index.html>
>
> For sure the guy grew up in a bad way :) Just take a look at his name, is he
> an hybrid between Homer and Simon & Garfunkel? (Well, I can't say my name is
> better - translated it would sound like "Peter Paul Smoking Chickens" - but
> his sounds like "Mrs. Robinson's Donuts"...)
>
> I'd give him a big phat "californian" what-EVERRRRRR :) :) :)
He wrote a follow-up because a few people gave him a 'what-EVERRRRR'...
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/garf/2001/01/18/java_response/index.html
geir
(And if "californian", wouldn't that be 'what-EV- hey? what happened
to the lights? ' )
--
Geir Magnusson Jr. geirm@optonline.com
Developing for the web? See http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/