81 lines
3.7 KiB
Plaintext
81 lines
3.7 KiB
Plaintext
From fork-admin@xent.com Wed Aug 28 18:28:06 2002
|
|
Return-Path: <fork-admin@xent.com>
|
|
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
|
|
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
|
|
by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A52A143F99
|
|
for <jm@localhost>; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 13:28:06 -0400 (EDT)
|
|
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
|
|
by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
|
|
for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 28 Aug 2002 18:28:06 +0100 (IST)
|
|
Received: from xent.com ([64.161.22.236]) by dogma.slashnull.org
|
|
(8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7SHLxZ02684 for <jm@jmason.org>;
|
|
Wed, 28 Aug 2002 18:22:13 +0100
|
|
Received: from lair.xent.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xent.com (Postfix)
|
|
with ESMTP id 631EE29422C; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:19:10 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Delivered-To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
Received: from jamesr.best.vwh.net (jamesr.best.vwh.net [192.220.76.165])
|
|
by xent.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 81DA529409A for <fork@xent.com>;
|
|
Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:18:35 -0700 (PDT)
|
|
Received: (qmail 53311 invoked by uid 19621); 28 Aug 2002 17:20:03 -0000
|
|
Received: from unknown (HELO avalon) ([64.125.200.18]) (envelope-sender
|
|
<jamesr@best.com>) by 192.220.76.165 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for
|
|
<fork@xent.com>; 28 Aug 2002 17:20:03 -0000
|
|
Subject: Re: Java is for kiddies
|
|
From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
|
|
To: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
In-Reply-To: <3D6BA1A1.90306@barrera.org>
|
|
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0208270202170.7689-100000@watcher.mithral.com>
|
|
<3D6BA1A1.90306@barrera.org>
|
|
Content-Type: text/plain
|
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
|
|
X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.2-5mdk
|
|
Message-Id: <1030556128.7585.29.camel@avalon>
|
|
MIME-Version: 1.0
|
|
Sender: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
Errors-To: fork-admin@xent.com
|
|
X-Beenthere: fork@spamassassin.taint.org
|
|
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
|
|
Precedence: bulk
|
|
List-Help: <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=help>
|
|
List-Post: <mailto:fork@spamassassin.taint.org>
|
|
List-Subscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>, <mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=subscribe>
|
|
List-Id: Friends of Rohit Khare <fork.xent.com>
|
|
List-Unsubscribe: <http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork>,
|
|
<mailto:fork-request@xent.com?subject=unsubscribe>
|
|
List-Archive: <http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/>
|
|
Date: 28 Aug 2002 10:35:27 -0700
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 2002-08-27 at 08:58, Joseph S. Barrera III wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
> C is more reliable than Java??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Both are reliable. "Reliability" is more a function of the software
|
|
engineer. I've written complicated mission-critical server software in
|
|
Java that will run without a hiccup as long as the Unix box it is
|
|
sitting on is running. Same with C. For processes that are running
|
|
months at a time, and in my case constantly touching databases and doing
|
|
lots of low-level network stuff, reliability is obtained by making sure
|
|
every conceivable problem (and problems you didn't conceive of) recovers
|
|
to a clean/safe process state so that things keep running i.e. it is a
|
|
design/programming issue.
|
|
|
|
That said, we usually prototype serious systems in Java and then
|
|
re-implement them in C if we have time. Java doesn't scale well as a
|
|
language for server apps, though not for the reasons usually offered.
|
|
The problem is that for high-end server apps, you really need fairly
|
|
detailed and low-level control of system resources to get around
|
|
bottlenecks that show up relatively quickly in languages that don't give
|
|
you access to it. You can squeeze several times the performance out of
|
|
a C server program than a Java one simply by being able to finely tune
|
|
(or more frequently, bypass) the system resource management.
|
|
Nonetheless, this is not a significant factor for most applications you
|
|
could conceivably develop in either language, as most aren't limited by
|
|
raw performance scalability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
-James Rogers
|
|
jamesr@best.com
|
|
|
|
|