--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-symp...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
+1000
Java: terrible language, great tools.--
On Thursday, 10 October 2013 22:19:00 UTC+1, Kevin Burton wrote:This is interesting:I can definitely understand the pain. If you're NEW to java the verbosity and idiosyncrasies probably seem insanely stupid. Then factor into account things like generics, type erasure, etc.But ... the good news here is look at clojure and scala... thats pretty sweet.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-symp...@googlegroups.com.
--You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/mechanical-sympathy/TDSanIzccLE/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all of its topics, send an email to mechanical-symp...@googlegroups.com.
It's funny, having just started in Maven and Spring after 4 years of programming Java without them, they're now the first thing that comes to my mind when I try to explain Java hate. The gobs of XML, the dead ends in tracing through code because some method call is defined in a config file somewhere, the 30 layer deep call stacks, the annoying naming of everything as a "bean" ... *these* are the kinds of things that frustrate programmers and make them dream of greener pastures -- even if there really aren't much better alternatives to these tools for their common use cases (big enterprisey projects with lots of developers).
And don't get me started on Spring's inherent hostility to immutability and final fields ....
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-symp...@googlegroups.com.
IMHO migrating to Spring encourages you to use dependency injection. But I see it being mostly "stone soup" in this regard as you can do DI in plain Java without a framework. You just need the methodology.
--
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
If you can get past the B.S. and really understand Java you find it is a great language. I am not such a fan of Scala. The "scala" language that most people program in is really a DSL built on top of a more primitive language, and like any DSL written in Scala there's a definite structural instability as you move away from the beautiful code samples you see in the textbooks to real ones.
If you can get past the B.S. and really understand Java you find it is a great language. I am not such a fan of Scala. The "scala" language that most people program in is really a DSL built on top of a more primitive language, and like any DSL written in Scala there's a definite structural instability as you move away from the beautiful code samples you see in the textbooks to real ones.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-symp...@googlegroups.com.
If you can get past the B.S. and really understand Java you find it is a great language. I am not such a fan of Scala. The "scala" language that most people program in is really a DSL built on top of a more primitive language, and like any DSL written in Scala there's a definite structural instability as you move away from the beautiful code samples you see in the textbooks to real ones.
Doug Lea says in their benchmarks they saw throughput level off when recursive tasks were forked beyond 20 cores.
Future of the JVM talk I moderated at PhillyETE in April, 2013. He says it at the 7 minute mark, but it's actually specific to object references, not primitives.
On Monday, October 14, 2013 7:19:43 AM UTC-7, pron wrote:
That's a fair clarification. I don't want to put words in Doug's mouth, but I did not take his explanation to mean that they were performing the boxing at the time of the sort. My interpretation was that the sorting of an array of primitive ints (since they couldn't be in a Java collection) would scale linearly with the number of cores. The boxed Integers would not beyond 20 cores, but he doesn't specify if those are in an array or in a array-based (or non array-based) Java collection. I'd like to drum up some numbers or look at Doug's tests.
Tough to say. I'll ask him for a clarification.
On Monday, October 14, 2013 2:54:29 PM UTC-7, pron wrote:
Some of the tests are in with our misc perf tests:
http://gee.cs.oswego.edu/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/jsr166/src/test/loops/
See BoxedLongSort vs ScalarLongSort
The checked in versions haven't been updated for JDK8 yet though.
They test arrays of longs vs arrays of Longs.
The main difference vs sequential is that in seq, boxing adds
only indirection overhead, but in parallel, also locality:
the Long referenced from an array slot is likely elsewhere, and
getting it worsens cache pollution/thrashing among cores.
By a lot.
Were you seeing linear scaling in your usage of F/J with arrays complex objects as opposed to primitives? It would be interesting to compare the tests.
On 10/21/2013 05:03 PM, Gil Tene wrote:or array of value type ...
As Jamie notes, this is exactly what we seek to address with StructuredArray.
Rémi
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mechanical-sympathy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mechanical-sympathy+unsub...@googlegroups.com.