5 ms·

This seems like a good contract to the typical (american-inspired) secrecy around governmental systems. I would also like to believe open source makes software

This seems like a good contract to the typical (american-inspired) secrecy around governmental systems. I would also like to believe open source makes software more secure, but I'm not sure if there is any research that confirms it. Oh, and cool its made in python and not some enterprise java or .NET :)

skrebbel 13y ago
We're getting off topic, but you do know that it's perfectly possible to write decent Java or C# without it being "enterprise", right? (whatever that means) I'm starting to get sick of this "ruby/python/nodejs = cool, java/.net = slow bloated enterprise crap for men with suits" attitude that keeps reappearing here on HN. Whether your work environment is cool, whether your code is decent and snappy, all that has very little to do with your programming language choice. Admittedly, if you compare modern Ruby to VB6 you might conclude that VB sucks, but that's an unfair comparison since the technologies are a decade apart. It's like saying Python rocks because you hate COBOL. You can work at a scrappy startup and code lean C#, and you can work at a bureaucratic departmentalized hell and code AbstractProxyProviderFactoryProviders in Python. And, yes, you can even work at a bureaucratic departmentalized hell and code decent Python. Or Java. Or C#. Or Ruby.
- eli 13y ago
  Java Enterprise Edition is the name of an Oracle product. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaee/overview/index.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaee/overview/index... It's "enterprise" literally by definition.
  - skrebbel 13y ago
    Indeed, and so it's uncool and crappier than Python? How is that related? The OP clearly used the term "enterprise" with a negative connotation. I doubt he was referring to a brand name.
    - joelthelion 13y ago
      There is a verbose and enterprisy smell to the language itself. Just compare the hello worlds in java and python... Apart from that, I agree with you.
      - Afforess 13y ago
        Let's not. Unless you think we should also be comparing memory footprint, performance, etc of said 'Hello World'. Language pissing contests are dumb. Languages are tools, each serves a specific job.
        shiven 13y ago
        Java cannot be written without a code completion IDE (unless you are a masochist), python OTOH, does not have such limitations. Forget runtime performance, coding in Java sucks more than any other language in my 'limited' experience. com.java.cookie.JarFactoryMakingMonkeyWrenchFrenchFriedOnionTrainPlaneJaneSpain.... you get the point. Want to counter that? Show me tight, non-verbose, working code in Java. At the end of the day, what you call a 'pissing contest' is rooted in a figment of truth and reality.
        currywurst 13y ago
        Please take a look at the Apache Lucene and Tinkerpop Blueprints codebase that will soundly meet all your parameters.
    - glesica 13y ago
      I suspect the implication was that being written in Python makes the code more accessible to "normal" people, both to read and (perhaps to an even greater extent) to run. If it were written on .NET one would likely (because Mono is incomplete) need a Windows server to run the code. If it was written using Java there is a decent chance it would require some pretty complex configuration and possibly a license of some sort from Oracle. I might be misinterpreting the comment, but when I personally poke fun at Java or .NET for being "enterprise-y", this is more or less what I'm talking about.
- glogla 13y ago
  Quite a few Versions of EJB's were pretty terrible, and early Java Web Technologies had a bit of obsession with XML. However, current Swing is pretty pleasant to work with, and I think that most of the Java have stems from early PHP developers. If you had worked with PHP, with database queries and page formatting in one file, all the crazy MVC crap with business objects and and stuff must have seem needlessly complicated. And even if noone does develop like that now (I hope, anyway), the meme that Java is terrible prevails. EDIT: new Java, for example, looks about like this [1] and that's not all that complicated, even though I would like it more with webflow (technology for describing webpage in term of flows -- each flow is basically FSM with method calls specified on transitions and FMS-wide persistent storage). [1]: https://github.com/heroku/devcenter-spring-mvc-hibernate https://github.com/heroku/devcenter-spring-mvc-hibernate
- axaxs 13y ago
  Because java these days seems relegated to legacy code or the 'enterprise environment'. And that's fine with me, I've always hated it in any environment. The concept of 'write once, run anywhere' is fine and dandy in concept. Until you realize that it's a huge install base AND that there are 40 or so 'subversions'(updates) to each version. If I had a dime for every time i've seen a dozen java installs on a box, I'd be a rich man. It is truly the worst of both worlds. Python does the 'write once run anywhere' better. C/C++/Go/etc do compiled, binary work. Java is a bloated, half compiled mess. It's funny that you defend it so, using the 'age' argument. You do know that python is years older than both Java and C#? It's popular because it's done right, and has a good, open community, not because it's "new and trendy."
  - jwilliams 13y ago
    Java and the JVM are in still in prolific use - the JVM is a terrific piece of engineering. It features prominently in a bunch of large-scale web architectures (be it as straight Java, Hadoop, Scala or whatever). Note of these are traditional enterprise or legacy environments. I've never seem a major schism in Java or the JVM on the scale of the split between Python 2.x and 3.x. All my installs require (_at least_) two versions of Python as a result. In fact it was only just recently that Debian/Ubuntu consolidated from shipping with 3 versions of Python to 2. If you're talking about install base then I guess you're limiting this to client apps - because none of the issues you mention are an issue for server environments... Unless you are running a dozen Java pieces of tech that all require a specific version? In the last 10-15 years I've only ever seen the need for two Java versions once. And that was on AIX. On POWER chips. And it was a vendor, not a technical requirement.
    - varjag 13y ago
      JVM works, but let's not get carried away there. It still has method size limit of 64Kb here in 21st century, it is stack-based (reducing the possible optimization space considerably), and has no provisions for proper lexical scoping. People port languages to JVM for its ubiquity and massive amounts of library code, but I assure you none does it for some technical advantage.
joshfraser 13y ago
Agreed about open-source leading to greater security. Here's what I wrote on the topic a few years ago: http://www.onlineaspect.com/2010/01/19/openness-and-security-go-hand-in-hand/ http://www.onlineaspect.com/2010/01/19/openness-and-security...
ams6110 13y ago
I would also like to believe open source makes software more secure I would think in general that it does, but you also would have to be certain that the software actually running on the official voting system is the same as the "open source" version. I think that's a tough one.
anon_java_hater 13y ago
>I would also like to believe open source makes software more secure, but I'm not sure if there is any research that confirms it. OSS is more secure because it's easier to verify than machine code. The fact that it is still not easy to verify is simply a flaw in the choice of PL/build system. Obviously if you try to verify a project in C, you're not going to get far, as the behaviour of most of the code will be undefined. Code written in the E programming language (http://erights.org http://erights.org) for example, is orders of magnitudes more easy to verify, simply due to forced encapsulation and that the semantics of it are much more obvious.

skrebbel 13y ago

We're getting off topic, but you do know that it's perfectly possible to write decent Java or C# without it being "enterprise", right? (whatever that means) I'm starting to get sick of this "ruby/python/nodejs = cool, java/.net = slow bloated enterprise crap for men with suits" attitude that keeps reappearing here on HN. Whether your work environment is cool, whether your code is decent and snappy, all that has very little to do with your programming language choice. Admittedly, if you compare modern Ruby to VB6 you might conclude that VB sucks, but that's an unfair comparison since the technologies are a decade apart. It's like saying Python rocks because you hate COBOL. You can work at a scrappy startup and code lean C#, and you can work at a bureaucratic departmentalized hell and code AbstractProxyProviderFactoryProviders in Python. And, yes, you can even work at a bureaucratic departmentalized hell and code decent Python. Or Java. Or C#. Or Ruby.

eli 13y ago
Java Enterprise Edition is the name of an Oracle product. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaee/overview/index.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaee/overview/index... It's "enterprise" literally by definition.
- skrebbel 13y ago
  Indeed, and so it's uncool and crappier than Python? How is that related? The OP clearly used the term "enterprise" with a negative connotation. I doubt he was referring to a brand name.
  - joelthelion 13y ago
    There is a verbose and enterprisy smell to the language itself. Just compare the hello worlds in java and python... Apart from that, I agree with you.
    - Afforess 13y ago
      Let's not. Unless you think we should also be comparing memory footprint, performance, etc of said 'Hello World'. Language pissing contests are dumb. Languages are tools, each serves a specific job.
      - shiven 13y ago
        Java cannot be written without a code completion IDE (unless you are a masochist), python OTOH, does not have such limitations. Forget runtime performance, coding in Java sucks more than any other language in my 'limited' experience. com.java.cookie.JarFactoryMakingMonkeyWrenchFrenchFriedOnionTrainPlaneJaneSpain.... you get the point. Want to counter that? Show me tight, non-verbose, working code in Java. At the end of the day, what you call a 'pissing contest' is rooted in a figment of truth and reality.
        currywurst 13y ago
        Please take a look at the Apache Lucene and Tinkerpop Blueprints codebase that will soundly meet all your parameters.
  - glesica 13y ago
    I suspect the implication was that being written in Python makes the code more accessible to "normal" people, both to read and (perhaps to an even greater extent) to run. If it were written on .NET one would likely (because Mono is incomplete) need a Windows server to run the code. If it was written using Java there is a decent chance it would require some pretty complex configuration and possibly a license of some sort from Oracle. I might be misinterpreting the comment, but when I personally poke fun at Java or .NET for being "enterprise-y", this is more or less what I'm talking about.
glogla 13y ago
Quite a few Versions of EJB's were pretty terrible, and early Java Web Technologies had a bit of obsession with XML. However, current Swing is pretty pleasant to work with, and I think that most of the Java have stems from early PHP developers. If you had worked with PHP, with database queries and page formatting in one file, all the crazy MVC crap with business objects and and stuff must have seem needlessly complicated. And even if noone does develop like that now (I hope, anyway), the meme that Java is terrible prevails. EDIT: new Java, for example, looks about like this [1] and that's not all that complicated, even though I would like it more with webflow (technology for describing webpage in term of flows -- each flow is basically FSM with method calls specified on transitions and FMS-wide persistent storage). [1]: https://github.com/heroku/devcenter-spring-mvc-hibernate https://github.com/heroku/devcenter-spring-mvc-hibernate
axaxs 13y ago
Because java these days seems relegated to legacy code or the 'enterprise environment'. And that's fine with me, I've always hated it in any environment. The concept of 'write once, run anywhere' is fine and dandy in concept. Until you realize that it's a huge install base AND that there are 40 or so 'subversions'(updates) to each version. If I had a dime for every time i've seen a dozen java installs on a box, I'd be a rich man. It is truly the worst of both worlds. Python does the 'write once run anywhere' better. C/C++/Go/etc do compiled, binary work. Java is a bloated, half compiled mess. It's funny that you defend it so, using the 'age' argument. You do know that python is years older than both Java and C#? It's popular because it's done right, and has a good, open community, not because it's "new and trendy."
- jwilliams 13y ago
  Java and the JVM are in still in prolific use - the JVM is a terrific piece of engineering. It features prominently in a bunch of large-scale web architectures (be it as straight Java, Hadoop, Scala or whatever). Note of these are traditional enterprise or legacy environments. I've never seem a major schism in Java or the JVM on the scale of the split between Python 2.x and 3.x. All my installs require (_at least_) two versions of Python as a result. In fact it was only just recently that Debian/Ubuntu consolidated from shipping with 3 versions of Python to 2. If you're talking about install base then I guess you're limiting this to client apps - because none of the issues you mention are an issue for server environments... Unless you are running a dozen Java pieces of tech that all require a specific version? In the last 10-15 years I've only ever seen the need for two Java versions once. And that was on AIX. On POWER chips. And it was a vendor, not a technical requirement.
  - varjag 13y ago
    JVM works, but let's not get carried away there. It still has method size limit of 64Kb here in 21st century, it is stack-based (reducing the possible optimization space considerably), and has no provisions for proper lexical scoping. People port languages to JVM for its ubiquity and massive amounts of library code, but I assure you none does it for some technical advantage.

joshfraser 13y ago

Agreed about open-source leading to greater security. Here's what I wrote on the topic a few years ago: http://www.onlineaspect.com/2010/01/19/openness-and-security-go-hand-in-hand/ http://www.onlineaspect.com/2010/01/19/openness-and-security...

ams6110 13y ago

I would also like to believe open source makes software more secure I would think in general that it does, but you also would have to be certain that the software actually running on the official voting system is the same as the "open source" version. I think that's a tough one.

anon_java_hater 13y ago

>I would also like to believe open source makes software more secure, but I'm not sure if there is any research that confirms it. OSS is more secure because it's easier to verify than machine code. The fact that it is still not easy to verify is simply a flaw in the choice of PL/build system. Obviously if you try to verify a project in C, you're not going to get far, as the behaviour of most of the code will be undefined. Code written in the E programming language (http://erights.org http://erights.org) for example, is orders of magnitudes more easy to verify, simply due to forced encapsulation and that the semantics of it are much more obvious.