use Perl

• Stupid Words for Stupid Discussions (Score:1)

  by chromatic (983)

  I propose to replace the word "fast" in "X isn't as fast as Y" with "blurgle". After that, replace the word "scale" in "X doesn't scale as well as Y" with "pbibbip". That way, innocent bystanders who'd normally find these arguments convincing can realize that statements such as "Java isn't as blurgle as C++" and "Perl doesn't pbibbip as well as Java" are completely useless.

  Quote me on this.
  • Re:Stupid Words for Stupid Discussions (Score:2)

    by rafael (2125)

    You must be joking, pbibbip isn't even pronounceable. To be a doubleplusgood duckspeaker, you must use words that are easy to speak without even noticing.
    • Re:Stupid Words for Stupid Discussions (Score:1)

      by chromatic (983)

      The fact that you have to spit -- a lot -- while trying to pronounce it is a feature.
• Lies and Meaningless Statistics (Score:2)

  by ziggy (25)

  On the other hand, BeOS (C++) is still more responsive than my Linux desktop.

  BeOS' responsiveness has nothing to do with its use of C++ as an implementation language. You could reimplement Linux and C++ and it wouldn't magically become more responsive.

  When comparing two systems for speed/scalability, the only thing you can reasonably compare are the design and engineering of those systems. In every case, the better designed/better built system will be faster and more scalable. Period. The languag
  • Re:Lies and Meaningless Statistics (Score:2)

    by djberg96 (2603)

    BeOS' responsiveness has nothing to do with its use of C++ as an implementation language.

    So, if BeOS had been implemented in Java it would have been just as fast? You'll never convince me of that. But, yes, I understand your point about architecture.
    • Re:Lies and Meaningless Statistics (Score:1)

      by chromatic (983)

      I'm always a little suspicious of arguments based on benchmarks no one ran on code that doesn't exist!
      • Re:Lies and Meaningless Statistics (Score:2)

        by djberg96 (2603)

        By all means, whip up JavaOS and we'll benchmark. Let me know how it goes.
        • Re:Lies and Meaningless Statistics (Score:1)

          by chromatic (983)

          I don't particularly care if JaOS is faster than CppOS. I do care, though, that people use meaningful data if they compare various languages and platforms.
• Java vs. C++ (Score:1)

  by zatoichi (4897)

  Java was not adopted by a huge amount of developers because of its "speed". That it IS getting speedier is nothing but a good thing.
  • Re:Java vs. C++ (Score:1)

    by educated_foo (3106)

    You mean "that it was adopted was the best thing that happened to compiler researchers' funding since FORTRAN"...
    • Re:Java vs. C++ (Score:1)

      by zatoichi (4897)

      FORTRAN? What's that? ;-)