3 ms·

Every single company that has invested heavily in JITs for PHP, Ruby, Python etc. has done so because they have vast codebases, often millions of lines, written

Every single company that has invested heavily in JITs for PHP, Ruby, Python etc. has done so because they have vast codebases, often millions of lines, written in those languages and rewriting their codebase is infeasible: getting a 20% performance increase for everything from a dozen man-years is vastly cheaper than trying to optimize their entire codebase similarly yet alone rewrite large parts of the application in another language. Why start writing something in one of those languages? They have high-quality frameworks that make it quite easy to ship early and ship fast: the vast majority of web-based startups fail, or at most stagnate with at most tens of thousands of users, and for them the performance of the common interpreters is fine. If we want to see a phase shift away from them, we need frameworks that allow quick prototyping written in languages which are more easily optimised (and, honestly, JavaScript really isn't bad in terms of writing a JITing compiler).

tbrowbdidnso 10y ago
The point I was trying to make is that the idea that a JIT or compiled version will come along in a few years drives people to use slow languages for high performance projects in the first place. This creates a cycle where the language is used in a way that a JIT coming along is a self-fulfilling prophesy. The irony is that the companies investing the most money into eventual JIT/compilation are the same ones that wrote code believing it would "come around" one day. The only way to stop the madness is to avoid using these languages for high performance code in the first place. Having used many fast/slow languages over the years I'll say I don't really notice any increase in productivity one way or another, and no difference in the richness of the library ecosystem. Are there any studies that show more dynamic languages are more productive? Usually the argument is made that the more abstracted the language is from hardware the better it is to work in, but I don't notice a productivity difference in C#/Java vs Python/perl
- gsnedders 10y ago
  I'm not sure people have this idea that a JIT or AOT compiled version will come along; certainly ten years ago nobody really had that impression, has the rise of the JS VMs really changed this so much? To take FB as an example: AFAIK, it was written in PHP because Zuckerberg knew PHP. There was no expectation it would "come around" and it continued to be in PHP because bills had to be paid and rewriting everything would stop new features from being launched and hopefully reach profitability. If you're a small startup your first goal is almost always to hit profitability, and then your goal is almost always to maintain that. As a result, language choices are frequently made by what founders know rather than any technical merit.
- llukas 10y ago
  Try language with manual memory management and then you may notice difference.
threatofrain 10y ago
Instead of rewriting all their codebase at once, if a company choose to simply first target the performance-critical aspects of their software stack, and slowly replaced old code with new, then it doesn't sound so financially irrational. Isn't that what's happening with Dropbox?

tbrowbdidnso 10y ago

The point I was trying to make is that the idea that a JIT or compiled version will come along in a few years drives people to use slow languages for high performance projects in the first place. This creates a cycle where the language is used in a way that a JIT coming along is a self-fulfilling prophesy. The irony is that the companies investing the most money into eventual JIT/compilation are the same ones that wrote code believing it would "come around" one day. The only way to stop the madness is to avoid using these languages for high performance code in the first place. Having used many fast/slow languages over the years I'll say I don't really notice any increase in productivity one way or another, and no difference in the richness of the library ecosystem. Are there any studies that show more dynamic languages are more productive? Usually the argument is made that the more abstracted the language is from hardware the better it is to work in, but I don't notice a productivity difference in C#/Java vs Python/perl

gsnedders 10y ago
I'm not sure people have this idea that a JIT or AOT compiled version will come along; certainly ten years ago nobody really had that impression, has the rise of the JS VMs really changed this so much? To take FB as an example: AFAIK, it was written in PHP because Zuckerberg knew PHP. There was no expectation it would "come around" and it continued to be in PHP because bills had to be paid and rewriting everything would stop new features from being launched and hopefully reach profitability. If you're a small startup your first goal is almost always to hit profitability, and then your goal is almost always to maintain that. As a result, language choices are frequently made by what founders know rather than any technical merit.
llukas 10y ago
Try language with manual memory management and then you may notice difference.

threatofrain 10y ago

Instead of rewriting all their codebase at once, if a company choose to simply first target the performance-critical aspects of their software stack, and slowly replaced old code with new, then it doesn't sound so financially irrational. Isn't that what's happening with Dropbox?