Dear Clay, I couldn't help laughing, when I read your post.

This is clearly the most clear example of the pot calling the kettle 
black<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_pot_calling_the_kettle_black> I 
have ever seen.

Your post contains nothing, but ad 
hominem<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem>attacks. Nothing to counter the 
substance of the argument. It is, in fact, 
completely off topic.

I guess you havn't had a good day, and just felt like letting out a some 
steam ;)

On Thursday, February 28, 2013 7:13:28 AM UTC+1, clay wrote:
>
> "A Java™ Parallel Calamity"!?!?
>
> *This is the most childish, baseless attack I've ever read.* 
>
> If you are going to attack this technology for performance, you need some 
> kind of benchmarks to even begin to look like a serious criticism and not 
> just childish insults without any point.
>
> When JDK7 launched:  I did some benchmarks of my own: I implemented a 
> simple quick sort in serial, one with a simple thread pool with locked data 
> queues, one with a lockless data queues (using Atomic check-and-set ops), 
> and a fork-join implementation. The results were slightly hard to 
> interpret. For small volumes of data, serial worked the fastest. Locked 
> data queues were always slow. My custom lockless data queues worked about 
> as fast as JDK7 fork/join in the higher volume cases.
>
> *This is garbage. All attack and insults and Java sucks, .NET rules, and 
> nothing to back it up with.*
>
> I am critical of Java 8 (and Guava) for omitting map and flatMap from 
> Optional. I am critical of the Java language for other things, but I have 
> actual specific points with some kind of reason and evidence. *This is 
> just hateful trolling of the laziest and worst kind.*
>
> Cedric, no *he shouldn't submit this to lambda-dev*. Anyone can write 
> Java is *a big flaming pile of dung* and send it, but they shouldn't. 
> Thoughtful negativity is ok. *Ranting crazy hateful insults* are not. If 
> you have some better ideas, or if you think .NET has some better ideas, you 
> should start with some benchmarks or something close so that we can rule out
> * this kind of utter crap*. I have benchmarked fork/join as I said and it 
> did reasonably well. Even Typesafe uses JDK fork/join under the hood for 
> some Scala/Akka stuff and I suspect they chose it for a reason.
>
> Edward and Casper, *you are trolling in the worst, laziest, and most 
> disgusting way*. You should be *deeply embarrassed for posting this kind 
> of thing.* I don't see *an ounce of legitimate complaint* and nothing 
> beyond *Java sucks, .NET rules*.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java 
Posse" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to