5 ms·

When you're building a 'tower', what is more important? The strange new hammers and screwdrivers you're using, or the architecture, algorithms and data structur

by RyanZAG 10y ago

When you're building a 'tower', what is more important? The strange new hammers and screwdrivers you're using, or the architecture, algorithms and data structures?

continuational 10y ago
Please don't compare a programming language to a hammer. They're not similar in complexity, and it makes a really bad metaphor. Besides, unless you write entire applications in assembler, you DO care about programming languages.
- btschaegg 10y ago
  I completely agree. Bricks would be a better metaphor and still completely contrived. And turns out, you can't build skyscrapers without concrete and steel :) And just to be pedantic: When I bought my first SwissTools Insider[1], I realized that it's actually still possible to innovate in screwdriver design. That doesn't make them better for every task, but hey, that's the way it is. [1]: http://www.pbswisstools.com/de/werkzeuge/quality-hand-tools/schraubenzieher/produkt/pb-6461cn/ http://www.pbswisstools.com/de/werkzeuge/quality-hand-tools/...
- ganfortran 10y ago
  They are similar in outcome. Do u care about what language Amazon uses to write S3? Do u believe it is the language that make S3 succeed, or fail? Even as a programmer, as to the other services I am calling, things I do care about involving their stability and correctness that affecting my work. I care shit about what how they write their service underneath, may it be cool or dumb.
  - rusk 10y ago
    If we're going to insist on the carpentry tools metaphor ... hammer vs nailgun; a hammer can do everything a nailgun can do and more ... but if you're banging together a timber-frame for a house the nailgun will let you get through the task far far more quickly. If you're running a business, and time is money, which tool would you want your carpenters using for this task? If I'm running a business that lets say develops an ecommerce platform I won't be too impressed if my developers are using assembler. Java good, but if Scala gives them an edge and cuts my costs so much the better!
    - ganfortran 10y ago
      Yeah, so choose what works best for u, not assuming the same thing for others without understanding the specific problems they are trying to solve. Maybe they need a hammer, not a nail gun, because they work in specific environment that don't have sufficient power supply? or for the work they are doing, hammer is good enough, it is better for them to invest elsewhere.
      - rusk 10y ago
        I'm kind of making the point that in many environments you'll need both? A nailgun (battery or gas powered) for the "bulk" jobs and a hammer for the finer work. I can't imagine anyone being effective in Scala without first having a good knowledge of Java. Or at least without having Java expertise near to hand.
        the_af 10y ago
        I used to think so too, but at work I've met programmers who code in Scala without having learned Java first, and it's enlightening. They are proficient in Scala. Whenever they touch Java code, they are upset that the niceties and modern features of Scala aren't there -- whatever we thought was reasonable in Java or "not mainstream" in Scala are exactly the opposite to them. "Why do I have to write all this needless code in Java?", they ask (for example), nicely countering the common but unwarranted notion that Java's verbosity somehow makes code more understandable to regular joes. It's enlightening to me because a lot of what we consider "hard" or "too academic" is actually our own prejudices speaking. Of course it looks like that to us, coming from Java, but try talking to someone who learned Scala first :) I also find it encouraging. Maybe some day we will be able to finally take advantage of the JVM without the weight of Java-the-language.
        rusk 10y ago
        You've met programmers who know scala but not java but tell me this: Were they in an environment without java expertise "to hand"? To me scala is more akin to a skin over java. Particularly when using 3p libraries that were written in java (this ecosystem is one of scala's key advantages over other fucntionalesque programming environments). When you work with scala you'll always need some java guys nearby to deal with the "nitty gritty" details.
  - kelnos 10y ago
    I don't personally care what S3 is built using, but that doesn't mean the people who built S3 shouldn't care. Java, Scala, etc. are all tools with different strengths and weaknesses. Use the best tool for the job, considering the experience and capabilities of the team you have.
  - dbattaglia 10y ago
    Just because end users don't care about the language used to implement S3 doesn't mean the developers at Amazon don't care.
  - gotofritz 10y ago
    _I_ don't care what they use to write their platform, because it's a black box to me. But _they_ care and spend a lot of time debating it, and that's when discussions like the one in the article are important and shouldn't be dismissed.
- pron 10y ago
  > unless you write entire applications in assembler, you DO care about programming languages. That's true, but we've been in the region of diminishing returns for programming languages (I'm not talking about runtimes) for a long, long time now. To go back to the (bad?) tools metaphor, it's like saying that unless you're using nothing but your fingers, you DO care about tools. Well, yeah, but once you have a decent screwdriver, innovation in screwdriver technology -- short of a revolution -- is likely to yield diminishing returns on investment, especially as the cost of adoption remains high. Switching from, say, Java to Scala is not much cheaper (if at all) than switching from, say, assmebly language to FORTRAN or C. This does mean that the effort spent on switching languages (or screwdrivers) should decline.
Singletoned 10y ago
Just cause one thing is more important than another, doesn't mean the other thing is unimportant. You appear to be arguing against discussing tools, because they aren't as important as other things.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
kalleboo 10y ago
Modern skyscrapers would certainly not be reasonable to build without "strange new hammers and screwdrivers" (read: tower cranes, super-powered concrete pumps, etc).
kelnos 10y ago
Algorithms and data structures will be mostly the same regardless of what language you use. Architecture will generally not be. Scala and Java encourage building applications in different ways. That doesn't mean one is better than the other (though I'd argue you could make that claim), but some problem domains are better modeled with Scala, and likely some with Java. And some programmers work better tending toward a pure, immutable, functional style, while others work better with OO, side effects, and mutable data. While choice of language/framework may not be as important as many other choices you need to make when building an application, but it's not something that should be dismissed as irrelevant, either.
enraged_camel 10y ago
The point is that you have to care about your tools and know them really really well if you want to be able to build good software. That's something that holds across all fields of engineering and art.

by RyanZAG 10y ago

When you're building a 'tower', what is more important? The strange new hammers and screwdrivers you're using, or the architecture, algorithms and data structures?

continuational 10y ago

Please don't compare a programming language to a hammer. They're not similar in complexity, and it makes a really bad metaphor. Besides, unless you write entire applications in assembler, you DO care about programming languages.

btschaegg 10y ago
I completely agree. Bricks would be a better metaphor and still completely contrived. And turns out, you can't build skyscrapers without concrete and steel :) And just to be pedantic: When I bought my first SwissTools Insider[1], I realized that it's actually still possible to innovate in screwdriver design. That doesn't make them better for every task, but hey, that's the way it is. [1]: http://www.pbswisstools.com/de/werkzeuge/quality-hand-tools/schraubenzieher/produkt/pb-6461cn/ http://www.pbswisstools.com/de/werkzeuge/quality-hand-tools/...
ganfortran 10y ago
They are similar in outcome. Do u care about what language Amazon uses to write S3? Do u believe it is the language that make S3 succeed, or fail? Even as a programmer, as to the other services I am calling, things I do care about involving their stability and correctness that affecting my work. I care shit about what how they write their service underneath, may it be cool or dumb.
- rusk 10y ago
  If we're going to insist on the carpentry tools metaphor ... hammer vs nailgun; a hammer can do everything a nailgun can do and more ... but if you're banging together a timber-frame for a house the nailgun will let you get through the task far far more quickly. If you're running a business, and time is money, which tool would you want your carpenters using for this task? If I'm running a business that lets say develops an ecommerce platform I won't be too impressed if my developers are using assembler. Java good, but if Scala gives them an edge and cuts my costs so much the better!
  - ganfortran 10y ago
    Yeah, so choose what works best for u, not assuming the same thing for others without understanding the specific problems they are trying to solve. Maybe they need a hammer, not a nail gun, because they work in specific environment that don't have sufficient power supply? or for the work they are doing, hammer is good enough, it is better for them to invest elsewhere.
    - rusk 10y ago
      I'm kind of making the point that in many environments you'll need both? A nailgun (battery or gas powered) for the "bulk" jobs and a hammer for the finer work. I can't imagine anyone being effective in Scala without first having a good knowledge of Java. Or at least without having Java expertise near to hand.
      - the_af 10y ago
        I used to think so too, but at work I've met programmers who code in Scala without having learned Java first, and it's enlightening. They are proficient in Scala. Whenever they touch Java code, they are upset that the niceties and modern features of Scala aren't there -- whatever we thought was reasonable in Java or "not mainstream" in Scala are exactly the opposite to them. "Why do I have to write all this needless code in Java?", they ask (for example), nicely countering the common but unwarranted notion that Java's verbosity somehow makes code more understandable to regular joes. It's enlightening to me because a lot of what we consider "hard" or "too academic" is actually our own prejudices speaking. Of course it looks like that to us, coming from Java, but try talking to someone who learned Scala first :) I also find it encouraging. Maybe some day we will be able to finally take advantage of the JVM without the weight of Java-the-language.
        rusk 10y ago
        You've met programmers who know scala but not java but tell me this: Were they in an environment without java expertise "to hand"? To me scala is more akin to a skin over java. Particularly when using 3p libraries that were written in java (this ecosystem is one of scala's key advantages over other fucntionalesque programming environments). When you work with scala you'll always need some java guys nearby to deal with the "nitty gritty" details.
- kelnos 10y ago
  I don't personally care what S3 is built using, but that doesn't mean the people who built S3 shouldn't care. Java, Scala, etc. are all tools with different strengths and weaknesses. Use the best tool for the job, considering the experience and capabilities of the team you have.
- dbattaglia 10y ago
  Just because end users don't care about the language used to implement S3 doesn't mean the developers at Amazon don't care.
- gotofritz 10y ago
  _I_ don't care what they use to write their platform, because it's a black box to me. But _they_ care and spend a lot of time debating it, and that's when discussions like the one in the article are important and shouldn't be dismissed.
pron 10y ago
> unless you write entire applications in assembler, you DO care about programming languages. That's true, but we've been in the region of diminishing returns for programming languages (I'm not talking about runtimes) for a long, long time now. To go back to the (bad?) tools metaphor, it's like saying that unless you're using nothing but your fingers, you DO care about tools. Well, yeah, but once you have a decent screwdriver, innovation in screwdriver technology -- short of a revolution -- is likely to yield diminishing returns on investment, especially as the cost of adoption remains high. Switching from, say, Java to Scala is not much cheaper (if at all) than switching from, say, assmebly language to FORTRAN or C. This does mean that the effort spent on switching languages (or screwdrivers) should decline.

Singletoned 10y ago

Just cause one thing is more important than another, doesn't mean the other thing is unimportant. You appear to be arguing against discussing tools, because they aren't as important as other things.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

kalleboo 10y ago

Modern skyscrapers would certainly not be reasonable to build without "strange new hammers and screwdrivers" (read: tower cranes, super-powered concrete pumps, etc).

kelnos 10y ago

Algorithms and data structures will be mostly the same regardless of what language you use. Architecture will generally not be. Scala and Java encourage building applications in different ways. That doesn't mean one is better than the other (though I'd argue you could make that claim), but some problem domains are better modeled with Scala, and likely some with Java. And some programmers work better tending toward a pure, immutable, functional style, while others work better with OO, side effects, and mutable data. While choice of language/framework may not be as important as many other choices you need to make when building an application, but it's not something that should be dismissed as irrelevant, either.

enraged_camel 10y ago

The point is that you have to care about your tools and know them really really well if you want to be able to build good software. That's something that holds across all fields of engineering and art.