If you link to wikipedia pages, do you actually read them? That wasn't an ad hominem attack. Ad hominem is: "His argument is wrong because he has an ugly face".
On Saturday, March 2, 2013 9:36:38 AM UTC+1, morten hattesen wrote: > > 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.
