3 ms·
You see the JVM as an asset. Many consider it a liability. And programmers in the New Jersey school (see Worse is Better) are unlikely to ever stomach Clojure.
by ericbb 14y ago
You see the JVM as an asset. Many consider it a liability.
And programmers in the New Jersey school (see Worse is Better) are unlikely to ever stomach Clojure.
These differences are more in the realm of deep allegiances and HN comments will probably be limited to revealing allegiances--they have little chance to sway the reader one way or the other.
Might as well say, "MIT type with love for the JVM? Choose Clojure. New Jersey type with love for native code? Choose Go".
- pron 14y agoI realize I've started a pretty ridiculous language war; that was not my intent. But I still cannot understand why anyone would want to use a language that is mostly meant for non-constrained environments, does not provide some major productivity advantages over JVM languages while being slower than JVM languages. I would totally consider using use Go if it targeted the JVM. You say some people consider the JVM a liability. Can you please explain why? As far as I can see, the JVM has two disadvantages: a high RAM footprint and a slow startup time. But on server-class hardware (and I believe that's probably the main environment for Go), it's hard to beat the JVM's performance, and nothing even comes close in providing similar monitoring. So -- and I'm asking this completely seriously -- why would anyone consider the JVM a liability in such an environment?
- jasonjackson 14y agoI don't understand either. Let history decide, we use Clojure & Java for server-side stuff it saves us countless hours/problems.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jacquesm 14y agoI have another problem with the JVM and it's oracle.