4 ms·

I didn't say Java is used over C or C++. In fact, I stated that, given some requirements, you are better off with dedicated hardware. Granted, I have not worke

I didn't say Java is used over C or C++. In fact, I stated that, given some requirements, you are better off with dedicated hardware. Granted, I have not worked in finance for over 10 years, but I also try to keep up with the times, thanks to some friends, mainly operating in the EU/UK market. But I would not say it is odd to think that Java is ubiquitous, given how technologies often permeate across teams. This is a bit like what happened to Python and FORTRAN, being the latter still widely used in the scientific world, especially physics, but Python adoption is definitely growing, despite its obvious shortcomings. Now, I understand that the hard requirements around HFT are wildly different, but from the perspective of an employer, having a larger pool of professionals and tools, would offer significant savings. Why wouldn't they take it?

jakewins 6y ago
> Why wouldn't they take it? Because the pool of Java devs is only marginally wider than the pool of C++ devs? 5.4M C++ devs vs 7.1M Java devs is not a massive difference in pools: https://www.daxx.com/blog/development-trends/number-software-developers-world https://www.daxx.com/blog/development-trends/number-software... And while I don't have numbers for it, my experience has been that the vast majority of Java devs have very little experience with the kind of specialized use of the JVM that low latency programming requires. On the contrary, I've found it difficult to hire for high-performance Java codebases, because the way they are written is completely different from how "normal" Java is written, so you need to retrain devs used to writing "normal" Java.
- manuelabeledo 6y ago
  > 5.4M C++ devs vs 7.1M Java devs is not a massive difference in pools That depends on the geographic distribution, though. Also, we are talking of a 25% larger pool. > And while I don't have numbers for it, my experience has been that the vast majority of Java devs have very little experience with the kind of specialized use of the JVM that low latency programming requires. You could say the same about C++ developers. Most of the C/C++ jobs are in embedded devices, which differ vastly from HFT environments.
vgatherps 6y ago
I believe I misread your first sentence, I thought you said every prop shop IS using Java. I have seen this specific claim so many times that I must have filled in the word. The reason not to use java for low latency latency is that good low latency Java is pretty much only Java in a syntactic and to some degree object sense. Avoiding allocation permeates everything, and is just not worthy the battle. You basically try to write C++ in Java, except without the language features of C++ to help with memory management and layout, and wit the added burden of having to worry about pools and primitive boxing and the runtime at every corner. You would also be surprised though at how little hardware has replaced C++ on Linux with good user space networking. Not that many trades are pure latency arb, so getting that last microsecond or two just isn’t worth the effort. It’s much more common to see hardware in fixed-function locations than it is to see hardware running the meat of a strategy.

jakewins 6y ago

> Why wouldn't they take it? Because the pool of Java devs is only marginally wider than the pool of C++ devs? 5.4M C++ devs vs 7.1M Java devs is not a massive difference in pools: https://www.daxx.com/blog/development-trends/number-software-developers-world https://www.daxx.com/blog/development-trends/number-software... And while I don't have numbers for it, my experience has been that the vast majority of Java devs have very little experience with the kind of specialized use of the JVM that low latency programming requires. On the contrary, I've found it difficult to hire for high-performance Java codebases, because the way they are written is completely different from how "normal" Java is written, so you need to retrain devs used to writing "normal" Java.

manuelabeledo 6y ago
> 5.4M C++ devs vs 7.1M Java devs is not a massive difference in pools That depends on the geographic distribution, though. Also, we are talking of a 25% larger pool. > And while I don't have numbers for it, my experience has been that the vast majority of Java devs have very little experience with the kind of specialized use of the JVM that low latency programming requires. You could say the same about C++ developers. Most of the C/C++ jobs are in embedded devices, which differ vastly from HFT environments.

vgatherps 6y ago

I believe I misread your first sentence, I thought you said every prop shop IS using Java. I have seen this specific claim so many times that I must have filled in the word. The reason not to use java for low latency latency is that good low latency Java is pretty much only Java in a syntactic and to some degree object sense. Avoiding allocation permeates everything, and is just not worthy the battle. You basically try to write C++ in Java, except without the language features of C++ to help with memory management and layout, and wit the added burden of having to worry about pools and primitive boxing and the runtime at every corner. You would also be surprised though at how little hardware has replaced C++ on Linux with good user space networking. Not that many trades are pure latency arb, so getting that last microsecond or two just isn’t worth the effort. It’s much more common to see hardware in fixed-function locations than it is to see hardware running the meat of a strategy.