6 ms·

Java was intended to allow median programmers to build large systems, largely by removing a lot of sharp edges. In that regard it has been fantastically succes

Java was intended to allow median programmers to build large systems, largely by removing a lot of sharp edges. In that regard it has been fantastically successful.

dschiptsov 12y ago
Like in any religion, when enough people believe in a dogma it become a "truth". In my opinion, Java's "success" is a like a "religion". It is relatively easy to make money on "believers". Nevertheless, facts are that in telecoms we have "success" of Erlang, in Android we have "success" of NDK, on server side there is everything mixed, and if someone would collect statistics of failed projects and project went hugely over time and budgets Java would be on the first place. And here, in my opinion, it would be a more of causation, not mere correlation.
- jacques_chester 12y ago
  Your "sarcasm", which I assume are coming from your own strongly-held "beliefs", is not "positively contributing" to this "discussion". Let's stop here.
  - dschiptsov 12y ago
    This is good one, thanks.) I have silly habits of writing, indeed.
  - dschiptsov 12y ago
    http://karma-engineering.com/lab/wiki/Languages http://karma-engineering.com/lab/wiki/Languages - strongly-held "beliefs".
beagle3 12y ago
> allow median programmers to build large systems > In that regard it has been fantastically successful. It allows median programmers to work for years on large systems, yes, and usually to maintain them as well. That indeed has been my experience. However, in my experience, it is not those median programmers that actually built those systems, and wouldn't have been able to. Much better skilled individuals did. In my experience, large systems built by mostly median programmers tend to fail (or never even reach production status), regardless of the implementation language. Which is to be expected, since system complexity is often inherent. However, it seems like the idea that "all programmers are just replaceable cogs" and thus that's not the case is way more prevalent around Java (and to some extent .net) than around other ecosystems. Java has been fantastically successful in the sense of keeping armies of programmers employed maintaining large systems, and at keeping those systems running. Personally, I suspect that most of those cases could have been fantastically more successful if they didn't use the "replaceable cog" model that for many projects is Java's core feature - but of course I cannot offer any proof.
- dschiptsov 12y ago
  Yeah, let's say that "Java creates jobs", which is not the same as "Java solves problems".

Java was intended to allow median programmers to build large systems, largely by removing a lot of sharp edges. In that regard it has been fantastically successful.

dschiptsov 12y ago

Like in any religion, when enough people believe in a dogma it become a "truth". In my opinion, Java's "success" is a like a "religion". It is relatively easy to make money on "believers". Nevertheless, facts are that in telecoms we have "success" of Erlang, in Android we have "success" of NDK, on server side there is everything mixed, and if someone would collect statistics of failed projects and project went hugely over time and budgets Java would be on the first place. And here, in my opinion, it would be a more of causation, not mere correlation.

jacques_chester 12y ago
Your "sarcasm", which I assume are coming from your own strongly-held "beliefs", is not "positively contributing" to this "discussion". Let's stop here.
- dschiptsov 12y ago
  This is good one, thanks.) I have silly habits of writing, indeed.
- dschiptsov 12y ago
  http://karma-engineering.com/lab/wiki/Languages http://karma-engineering.com/lab/wiki/Languages - strongly-held "beliefs".

beagle3 12y ago

> allow median programmers to build large systems > In that regard it has been fantastically successful. It allows median programmers to work for years on large systems, yes, and usually to maintain them as well. That indeed has been my experience. However, in my experience, it is not those median programmers that actually built those systems, and wouldn't have been able to. Much better skilled individuals did. In my experience, large systems built by mostly median programmers tend to fail (or never even reach production status), regardless of the implementation language. Which is to be expected, since system complexity is often inherent. However, it seems like the idea that "all programmers are just replaceable cogs" and thus that's not the case is way more prevalent around Java (and to some extent .net) than around other ecosystems. Java has been fantastically successful in the sense of keeping armies of programmers employed maintaining large systems, and at keeping those systems running. Personally, I suspect that most of those cases could have been fantastically more successful if they didn't use the "replaceable cog" model that for many projects is Java's core feature - but of course I cannot offer any proof.

dschiptsov 12y ago
Yeah, let's say that "Java creates jobs", which is not the same as "Java solves problems".