Java 18 / JDK 18: General Availability • Hacker News Board

Re: Java 18 / JDK 18: General Availability

#301

Post by igouy » Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 3:28 PM UTC

munificent wrote: post #292

igouy wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But almost every managed language at the time had poor performance. Slow compared to Smalltalk. Slow compared to Lisp.

Depends on which implementations you're talking about. But even fast Smalltalks weren't very fast relative to C, just relative to most other dynamic languages. And, of course, the people who made Smalltalk fast ended up making Java even faster.

> relative to C

Seemed like you'd shifted your comparison to "almost every managed language."

So Java at-the-time compared to Smalltalk and Lisp at-the-time.

I suppose Haskell at-the-time, OCaml at-the-time :-)

Re: Java 18 / JDK 18: General Availability

#302

Post by igouy » Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 3:32 PM UTC

jollybean wrote: post #300

igouy wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Go ahead and run some code… https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/...

Oi Vei, I literally said 'fast at getting up and going' and 'over time Java is more optimised'. Those tests ultimately measure 'peak performance'. Java takes much longer to reach that level than V8. Given the fact that a lot of software does not run for a long period of time, and especially UI/Web code (and possibly serverless), the net result is that V8 is basically faster. It gets too near 100% performance after 1…

You "literally said" so much, but not anything specific that you've measured and others could measure.

Re: Java 18 / JDK 18: General Availability

#303

Post by munificent » Thu, Mar 24, 2022, 9:31 PM UTC

igouy wrote: post #301

munificent wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on which implementations you're talking about. But even fast Smalltalks weren't very fast relative to C, just relative to most other dynamic languages. And, of course, the people who made Smalltalk fast ended up making Java even faster.

> relative to C Seemed like you'd shifted your comparison to "almost every managed language." So Java at-the-time compared to Smalltalk and Lisp at-the-time. I suppose Haskell at-the-time, OCaml at-the-time :-)

I did say "almost every" and not "every". :)

Were there fast managed languages? Yes, a couple.

Were there fast managed object-oriented languages? Yes, Self and a Smalltalk or two.

Were there fast managed statically typed languages? Yes, SML and Haskell.

Where there fast, managed, statically typed, and object-oriented languages? Not many. Maybe Eiffel, but that was shackled by DbC dogmatism and probably some amount of Eurocentricity. I don't think Ada had GC back then and if your complaint is that Java is too verbose, you sure as heck aren't gonna like Ada.

Re: Java 18 / JDK 18: General Availability

#304

Post by krzyk » Wed, Mar 30, 2022, 7:09 AM UTC

toyg wrote: post #244

krzyk wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was just a coincidence. They do it right: ship when it is ready. LTS is not an openjdk term it is something that vendors might offer for any jdk version.

> LTS is not an openjdk term It's an Oracle term, and I expect the majority of OpenJDK committers and decision-makers are still from Oracle.

Yeah, but OpenJDK commiters thankfully don't care about it.

E.g. look on the things introduced in JDK 16 and JDK 17.

LTS is a good gimmick for decision makers in companies, but developers also don't care about it (it is not LTS as in e.g. Ubuntu).