[freenet-support] Re: [Tech] Re: [freenet-dev] Retiring from the project
On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 05:23:00PM +0100, Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>(consider the amount of time we would spend dealing with memory leaks > >>and array overflows had we implemented in C++). As for focus, our > > > > > >You are living in a dream world, really. > > No, you are living in a dream world if you think I am going to dignify > your off-topic cross-posted rant with a response. You just did. What was the reason for cross-posting your mail, btw.? > If people can't start exercising some common sense with respect to > off-topic posts we will have no choice but to restrict posting to devl > in some manner, and I *really* don't want to do that. Yeah, free speech, accessible for every windows user etc. etc... -- -==- | ==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e| -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | | ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Re: [Tech] Re: [freenet-dev] Retiring from the project
On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 07:04:39PM -0400, Jay Oliveri wrote: > On Thursday 27 May 2004 09:43 am, Marc Lehmann wrote: > > On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:42:37PM -0500, Conrad Sabatier > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I find Java's memory requirements to be totally unreasonable, its > > > performance lackluster, and I've finally come to the conclusion that it > > > was indeed a poor choice of language in which to implement a project of > > > this size and complexity. A native-compiled language would have offered > > > vastly superior speed and, no doubt, significantly lower memory > > > consumption as well. > > > > And most likely vastly improved portability, too, as most native compiled > > languages are far more portable than java (and especially freenet, which > > basically runs on windows, linux/x86 and whatever emulates these only, > > due to it's dependencies on the sun sdk). > > Natively compiled languages more portable than Java? Can you provide > examples? > > Windows is a real problem in this area, as far as writing portable code is > concerned. Since windows only ships with POSIX.1, you'll have to rewrite > everything that uses functions in the later revisions, which includes > pthreads. Even then the API's don't work equally well (for example, > performing a stat() on an already opened file works fine on Linux, but on > Windows returns an error). > > I've found that debugging fcptools on Windows allows me to see more errors, > and therefore has been my choice for testing since Windows doesn't allow as > much freedom as Linux does, for better or worse. > > Choosing Java in this respect eliminates these issues, and puts the > "platform independent" effort squarely on someone else's shoulders, which > in this case is the author of the JVM. Can you name a natively compiled > language that requires no third-party libs which comes close to J2SE? MOST OF those issues. Not all. There are issues with files even in java. -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[freenet-support] Re: [Tech] Re: [freenet-dev] Retiring from the project
On Thursday 27 May 2004 09:43 am, Marc Lehmann wrote: > On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 09:42:37PM -0500, Conrad Sabatier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I find Java's memory requirements to be totally unreasonable, its > > performance lackluster, and I've finally come to the conclusion that it > > was indeed a poor choice of language in which to implement a project of > > this size and complexity. A native-compiled language would have offered > > vastly superior speed and, no doubt, significantly lower memory > > consumption as well. > > And most likely vastly improved portability, too, as most native compiled > languages are far more portable than java (and especially freenet, which > basically runs on windows, linux/x86 and whatever emulates these only, > due to it's dependencies on the sun sdk). Natively compiled languages more portable than Java? Can you provide examples? Windows is a real problem in this area, as far as writing portable code is concerned. Since windows only ships with POSIX.1, you'll have to rewrite everything that uses functions in the later revisions, which includes pthreads. Even then the API's don't work equally well (for example, performing a stat() on an already opened file works fine on Linux, but on Windows returns an error). I've found that debugging fcptools on Windows allows me to see more errors, and therefore has been my choice for testing since Windows doesn't allow as much freedom as Linux does, for better or worse. Choosing Java in this respect eliminates these issues, and puts the "platform independent" effort squarely on someone else's shoulders, which in this case is the author of the JVM. Can you name a natively compiled language that requires no third-party libs which comes close to J2SE? -- Jay Oliveri GnuPG ID: 0x5AA5DD54 FCPTools Maintainer www.sf.net/users/joliveri ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[freenet-support] Re: [Tech] Re: [freenet-dev] Retiring from the project
Marc Lehmann wrote: On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 04:38:25AM +0100, Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (consider the amount of time we would spend dealing with memory leaks and array overflows had we implemented in C++). As for focus, our You are living in a dream world, really. No, you are living in a dream world if you think I am going to dignify your off-topic cross-posted rant with a response. I will not perpetuate programming language advocacy on the development mailing list (or, indeed, the support list), I request that others follow my lead or we risk devaluing these mailing lists for everyone (it wouldn't be the first time that a Freenet mailing list has been rendered useless in this manner). If people can't start exercising some common sense with respect to off-topic posts we will have no choice but to restrict posting to devl in some manner, and I *really* don't want to do that. Ian. ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
