4 ms·

I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling.

I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling. Go is hardly a "modern language" from a language design perspective so you're not gaining much over Java here. It has horrendous package management and the IDEs, debuggers, profilers and live monitoring tools are probably a decade or more behind the tools available for Java and the JVM. It's also much harder to find Go programmers than it is Java programmers. Python is a very slow dynamically typed language with a horrible deployment and concurrency story. A lot of big companies justifiably won't even consider a dynamically typed language. Again all the tooling from package management to profilers to debuggers is way behind what's available for Java and the JVM. C# is a real competitor but for the most part it's still tied to Windows. This is slowly changing but the vast majority of C# libraries still require the full .NET runtime on Windows and the open source community around C# is a small fraction of the size of the community around JVM languages.

jhall1468 9y ago
> I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling You're just wrong there. There are plenty of languages that do something better than Java, but none of them do everything better than Java. > I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling Now we are traversing into "my opinion is fact here". > Python is a very slow dynamically typed language with a horrible deployment and concurrency story. Who the hell uses Python for concurrency? It has a global interpreter lock... if your use case obligates concurrency and you pick Python you just don't understand what you are doing. > C# is a real competitor but for the most part it's still tied to Windows. Yes, let's dismiss every other language because Python is bad at concurrency and you don't like Go's package manager... Give me a break.
- asdf1234 9y ago
  > There are plenty of languages that do something better than Java I agree and I never said otherwise. I specifically addressed three of the languages you named (Python, Go and C#). > Now we are traversing into "my opinion is fact here". I'd love to see someone argue that Go or Python have superior tooling to Java and the JVM. > Yes, let's dismiss every other language I'm not dismissing every other language, I don't even use Java regularly, I'm dismissing two of the "modern" languages you named.
  - jhall1468 9y ago
    > I agree and I never said otherwise. I specifically addressed three of the languages you named (Python, Go and C#). By pointing out things that they do decidedly worse than Java, which was exactly the opposite of my point. > I'd love to see someone argue that Go or Python have superior tooling to Java and the JVM. I never said they did, because they don't, in general. But Python is absolutely superior in some areas (statistical modeling, machine learning) because the tools it uses are, objectively, better. > I'm not dismissing every other language, I don't even use Java regularly, I'm dismissing two of the "modern" languages you named. Right, you're dismissing them for decidedly stupid reasons. Literally no one on the planet is going to think Python is a good option for concurrency. And you're opinion on Go is literally just an opinion, that many (myself included) would absolutely disagree with.
    - asdf1234 9y ago
      > because the tools it uses are, objectively, better. Bullshit. Python is often used for early exploration but the people doing serious work in ML almost always end up using C++, Java or Scala. > you're dismissing them for decidedly stupid reasons So having relatively poor tooling, poor package management, poor performance and bad concurrency support aren't good reasons for dismissing a language? Go and Python aren't even particularly well designed languages. That's far more than you've given for dismissing Java and claiming that alternatives are "vastly better for a typical startup."
      - jhall1468 9y ago

jhall1468 9y ago

> I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling You're just wrong there. There are plenty of languages that do something better than Java, but none of them do everything better than Java. > I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling Now we are traversing into "my opinion is fact here". > Python is a very slow dynamically typed language with a horrible deployment and concurrency story. Who the hell uses Python for concurrency? It has a global interpreter lock... if your use case obligates concurrency and you pick Python you just don't understand what you are doing. > C# is a real competitor but for the most part it's still tied to Windows. Yes, let's dismiss every other language because Python is bad at concurrency and you don't like Go's package manager... Give me a break.

asdf1234 9y ago
> There are plenty of languages that do something better than Java I agree and I never said otherwise. I specifically addressed three of the languages you named (Python, Go and C#). > Now we are traversing into "my opinion is fact here". I'd love to see someone argue that Go or Python have superior tooling to Java and the JVM. > Yes, let's dismiss every other language I'm not dismissing every other language, I don't even use Java regularly, I'm dismissing two of the "modern" languages you named.
- jhall1468 9y ago
  > I agree and I never said otherwise. I specifically addressed three of the languages you named (Python, Go and C#). By pointing out things that they do decidedly worse than Java, which was exactly the opposite of my point. > I'd love to see someone argue that Go or Python have superior tooling to Java and the JVM. I never said they did, because they don't, in general. But Python is absolutely superior in some areas (statistical modeling, machine learning) because the tools it uses are, objectively, better. > I'm not dismissing every other language, I don't even use Java regularly, I'm dismissing two of the "modern" languages you named. Right, you're dismissing them for decidedly stupid reasons. Literally no one on the planet is going to think Python is a good option for concurrency. And you're opinion on Go is literally just an opinion, that many (myself included) would absolutely disagree with.
  - asdf1234 9y ago
    > because the tools it uses are, objectively, better. Bullshit. Python is often used for early exploration but the people doing serious work in ML almost always end up using C++, Java or Scala. > you're dismissing them for decidedly stupid reasons So having relatively poor tooling, poor package management, poor performance and bad concurrency support aren't good reasons for dismissing a language? Go and Python aren't even particularly well designed languages. That's far more than you've given for dismissing Java and claiming that alternatives are "vastly better for a typical startup."
    - jhall1468 9y ago