4 ms·

Not my toolchain, whatever was the case where I worked. That aside, my main point is that it was generally a slow, painful experience using Java, and it's more

Not my toolchain, whatever was the case where I worked. That aside, my main point is that it was generally a slow, painful experience using Java, and it's more that I'm not entirely sure if compile times were the reason (or only reason). For example, I continually noticed long and painful compile times, but when I mention these things elsewhere, the responses say Java actually compiles very quickly. There can be a runtime performance hit, but that's mainly if one switches to a language like Python or Ruby. That is, many compiled languages have runtime speeds similar to Java's. As for equivalent codebase sizes, do you mean literal lines of code, or having them provide the same functionality? I look mainly at equivalent functionality, as 1000 lines in Python can easily be doing much much more than 1000 lines in Java. You can probably search for comparisons (of Go and Java). In the beginning, Go was indisputably faster, but apparently they've introduced certain changes in the last year or so that's resulted in slower compile times. Even with slower compile times, it's likely Go still compiles much faster than Java, while also resulting in a smaller, more manageable codebase.

Cyph0n 10y ago
> There can be a runtime performance hit, but that's mainly if one switches to a language like Python or Ruby. That is, many compiled languages have runtime speeds similar to Java's. Yes, but you won't get a 10x reduction in LOC as you claim. The point is that LOC reduction is usually not "for free". > As for equivalent codebase sizes, do you mean literal lines of code, or having them provide the same functionality? I look mainly at equivalent functionality, as 1000 lines in Python can easily be doing much much more than 1000 lines in Java. Functionality. Of course it can, but you sacrifice performance. > Even with slower compile times, it's likely Go still compiles much faster than Java, while also resulting in a smaller, more manageable codebase. From what I've seen of Go, you typically need more LOC to achieve the same task compared to Java.
- baccheion 10y ago
  A 10x reduction isn't uncommon, unless the code wasn't doing much (or wasn't very large) to begin with. Either way, the reduction is quite significant. Where have you seen Go codebases being larger than Java's (with both providing the same amount of functionality)?
  - Cyph0n 10y ago
    Primarily common snippets or tasks I felt were a bit verbose in Go compared to Java, or at least as verbose as Java. > A 10x reduction isn't uncommon, unless the code wasn't doing much (or wasn't very large) to begin with. Either way, the reduction is quite significant. I'll shoot your question back at you: do you have any specific examples to back your claim? I don't like Java either to be frank, but I'm defending it because I'm not convinced by your original claim, i.e., Java has long compile times and is 10x more verbose.

Cyph0n 10y ago

> There can be a runtime performance hit, but that's mainly if one switches to a language like Python or Ruby. That is, many compiled languages have runtime speeds similar to Java's. Yes, but you won't get a 10x reduction in LOC as you claim. The point is that LOC reduction is usually not "for free". > As for equivalent codebase sizes, do you mean literal lines of code, or having them provide the same functionality? I look mainly at equivalent functionality, as 1000 lines in Python can easily be doing much much more than 1000 lines in Java. Functionality. Of course it can, but you sacrifice performance. > Even with slower compile times, it's likely Go still compiles much faster than Java, while also resulting in a smaller, more manageable codebase. From what I've seen of Go, you typically need more LOC to achieve the same task compared to Java.

baccheion 10y ago
A 10x reduction isn't uncommon, unless the code wasn't doing much (or wasn't very large) to begin with. Either way, the reduction is quite significant. Where have you seen Go codebases being larger than Java's (with both providing the same amount of functionality)?
- Cyph0n 10y ago
  Primarily common snippets or tasks I felt were a bit verbose in Go compared to Java, or at least as verbose as Java. > A 10x reduction isn't uncommon, unless the code wasn't doing much (or wasn't very large) to begin with. Either way, the reduction is quite significant. I'll shoot your question back at you: do you have any specific examples to back your claim? I don't like Java either to be frank, but I'm defending it because I'm not convinced by your original claim, i.e., Java has long compile times and is 10x more verbose.