4 ms·

Every few years, some version of this article comes out. The version of 30 years ago lamented how programmers don't really understand the hardware anymore becau

Every few years, some version of this article comes out. The version of 30 years ago lamented how programmers don't really understand the hardware anymore because a compiler abstracts the machine. 20 years ago, it was about how virtual machines (like the JVM / CLR) abstract memory management and developers write bloated software. We simply have more layers of abstraction that we depend on, and the interesting problems move up the stack. That trend will continue until the machines take over and write software. Until then, we'll continue to see this article show up, s/kubernetes/next-new-hotness.

erik_seaberg 5y ago
The stack also improves. Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, and the first CLR GC was so poor that my team at Microsoft had to resort to arrays of structs for keeping a service’s state. These days they’re great, and it’s hard to do better without putting a lot more effort into something like Rust.
- adrianN 5y ago
  The JVM is great, but I think it's not too difficult to do better in a language that doesn't force so much pointer-chasing. Cultural differences probably also play a role. Java systems tend to be engineered such that more pointer chasing happens even in places where the language doesn't force it.
  - WalterGR 5y ago
    Does the CLR improve on that much, with its stack-allocated structs?
- jcelerier 5y ago
  > Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, The fastest java software I use feels much slower than the slowest c++ one (talking about UI lag)
  - ratww 5y ago
    There's a popular saying about hardware vs software performance gains: "What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away". I think we can have another in anoter level: "What the language giveth, complex patterns and libraries taketh away". This works not only on performance levels, but also in terms of complexity.
    - throw0101a 5y ago
      * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law

erik_seaberg 5y ago

The stack also improves. Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, and the first CLR GC was so poor that my team at Microsoft had to resort to arrays of structs for keeping a service’s state. These days they’re great, and it’s hard to do better without putting a lot more effort into something like Rust.

adrianN 5y ago
The JVM is great, but I think it's not too difficult to do better in a language that doesn't force so much pointer-chasing. Cultural differences probably also play a role. Java systems tend to be engineered such that more pointer chasing happens even in places where the language doesn't force it.
- WalterGR 5y ago
  Does the CLR improve on that much, with its stack-allocated structs?
jcelerier 5y ago
> Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, The fastest java software I use feels much slower than the slowest c++ one (talking about UI lag)
- ratww 5y ago
  There's a popular saying about hardware vs software performance gains: "What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away". I think we can have another in anoter level: "What the language giveth, complex patterns and libraries taketh away". This works not only on performance levels, but also in terms of complexity.
  - throw0101a 5y ago
    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law