3 ms·

> - As lightweight as possible (i.e. no Java, Python or Ruby) I don't have suggestions for you, but I do have a question regarding this point. Why wouldn't Jav

> - As lightweight as possible (i.e. no Java, Python or Ruby) I don't have suggestions for you, but I do have a question regarding this point. Why wouldn't Java be considered lightweight? Java literally runs on your SIM card, which is a very bare-bones environment to run something on, I'd probably consider something like that pretty lightweight.

divan 4y ago
Ha, I'm from that generation of developers who have the mental model of what is actually happening on the hardware level when you run the program. Doesn't necesarilly mean I overoptimize or think about struct fields offsets or cache branching, but I do have this in my mental model and just can't unlearn it. When I think about how many stuff needs to be moved in cpu/memory/io bus just to launch simple "Hello, World" in Java - I just cannot accept it. I do realize that for large programs that overhead is small, but still the JVM concept is something I want to avoid as much as possible. Plus the sheer scale of Java SDK and amount of legacy and complexity behind it exceeds my treshold of "avoiding complexity" by orders of magnitude. And the nail to the coffin of "no java" stance is, of course, experience with desktop Java applications. Consistenly the worst UX experience and performance I've seen in 25 years among desktop apps.
- alexcg1 4y ago
  Don't remind me of desktop Java. What was that toolkit, swing(?) that was used in all the apps back in the day. PDFs have a special place in Hell, but Java desktop UXen deserve a whole special circle
  - divan 4y ago
    PDF history is pretty amazing, actually. The fact that PDF survived over so many decades is something worth reflecting upon :)
    - alexcg1 4y ago
      Cholera has survived for thousands of years. Doesn't mean I want to deal with it :) Seriously though, I agree. The fact that a file format can stick around that long is impressive.

divan 4y ago

Ha, I'm from that generation of developers who have the mental model of what is actually happening on the hardware level when you run the program. Doesn't necesarilly mean I overoptimize or think about struct fields offsets or cache branching, but I do have this in my mental model and just can't unlearn it. When I think about how many stuff needs to be moved in cpu/memory/io bus just to launch simple "Hello, World" in Java - I just cannot accept it. I do realize that for large programs that overhead is small, but still the JVM concept is something I want to avoid as much as possible. Plus the sheer scale of Java SDK and amount of legacy and complexity behind it exceeds my treshold of "avoiding complexity" by orders of magnitude. And the nail to the coffin of "no java" stance is, of course, experience with desktop Java applications. Consistenly the worst UX experience and performance I've seen in 25 years among desktop apps.

alexcg1 4y ago
Don't remind me of desktop Java. What was that toolkit, swing(?) that was used in all the apps back in the day. PDFs have a special place in Hell, but Java desktop UXen deserve a whole special circle
- divan 4y ago
  PDF history is pretty amazing, actually. The fact that PDF survived over so many decades is something worth reflecting upon :)
  - alexcg1 4y ago
    Cholera has survived for thousands of years. Doesn't mean I want to deal with it :) Seriously though, I agree. The fact that a file format can stick around that long is impressive.