Summarising the content: about 9:10 "virtual machines and garbage collection which when java first appeared were still ridiculous concepts" So I'm listening to a guy's thoughts on programming languages who apparently never heard of lisp and is seemingly unaware of Guy Steele. "Our time is much better spent using a high level language..." Which is a sweepingly generalisation for which the exceptions, nuances and cavea…
It's Bruce Eckel. He's selling whatever's flavor of the month. The guy switches languages more often than some people chance socks.
Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
31–40 of 50 posts
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java was not the first, he's touting Java as the first. It wasn't. while you're saying java wasn't even that, it was actually slow as. So we're really not disagreeing here.
From my comment that started this thread: about 9:10 "virtual machines and garbage collection which when java first appeared were still ridiculous concepts" Well absolutely, yeah, that's exactly what he did say. Word for word. In direct quotes. With a timestamp so you can go and listen to those exact words. Spelling it out there were multiple implementations of Lisp with garbage collection that were described by many…
He is clearly saying that the typical programmer at the time thought virtual machines and garbage collection were ridiculous because of their perceived lack of efficiency.
He never says he agrees with that assessment.
He is simply demonstrating what the common arguments were against Java at the time, and if you were programming back then you know he's correct - plenty of programmers were not convinced, and they were wrong.
> But let's not make this a language wars style "Nyer nyer you're wrong because I said. C is a virus.
This is not a language war. Lisp was my language of choice fifteen years ago, and is still one of my favorites.
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
From my comment that started this thread: about 9:10 "virtual machines and garbage collection which when java first appeared were still ridiculous concepts" Well absolutely, yeah, that's exactly what he did say. Word for word. In direct quotes. With a timestamp so you can go and listen to those exact words. Spelling it out there were multiple implementations of Lisp with garbage collection that were described by many…
I'm going to assume English is not your first language, because there is no other explanation as to why you can't understand what he's saying. He is clearly saying that the typical programmer at the time thought virtual machines and garbage collection were ridiculous because of their perceived lack of efficiency. He never says he agrees with that assessment . He is simply demonstrating what the common arguments were…
Starting 8:57 note this is direct quote, word for word accurate so that all the surrounding context is right there.
"Then java comes along and yes, java had a lot of, um, questionable decisions, but ah, some of the things that were brought along were the idea of virtual machines and garbage collection which when java first appeared were still ridiculous concepts that could never be efficient enough. And there was... And you can see the pattern of argument there's "Oh well it will never be efficient enough." And of course now we've had enough time to not really think about the efficiency of virtual machines and garbage collection it's basically proven - we've had faster and faster hardware and we realize our time is much better spent in um using a higher level language than it is chasing some of the bugs that happen without this kind of stuff." --Bruce Eckel
So there it is. Transcribed and checked. I'm not going mad (or at least this isn't further evidence of it). My assessment in the wider context of the surrounding quote looks completely accurate. Sweeping, nuance free generalization and ignorance of things that existed, commercially prior to Java. You may look at it squarely and decide to revisit your comments. I think he really does agree with the comments he is making himself while he's making them.
I have no idea why you're understanding something else that he isn't saying and putting words in his mouth that aren't there. If he meant something different to what he said, ok, he should have said something different to communicate the different thing, yeah? It doesn't usually pay to make assumptions based on no evidence so I'm not making any.
Revisiting this whole thread it looks about as pointless as the time dropped on the video. I shouldn't tar scala with that brush though, it may not be representative of either the language or its community.
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#34Like others, I was also a bit perplexed by his description of the community. In his descriptions of Python's BDFL, I couldn't help but feel Odersky's leadership was shortchanged a bit. I primarily programmed in Scala for the past year and my experience with the community has been nothing but positive, whether on mailing lists or StackOverflow.
Of course, perception is reality, and even Odersky has spoken on a culture of elitism in Scala in the past. I also think the lack of women in the Scala scene makes a point in itself, as well. I just wish more cogent examples had been provided, because the problems in the community need to be highlighted before they can be solved.
My biggest issue with Scala hasn't been community, but lack of maturity on the project level. The larger Python, JS, and Ruby communities simply have more out there in terms of community contributed content. The tradeoff for me has been that versus the sheer elegance of Scala.
I also think there's a lot of truth to the point that the multiparadigm of ways to do something in Scala leads to each team or organization developing a distinct style, which is unfortunate. On the other hand, Scala code seems have this property of evolution toward succinctness and elegance over time. You may not know how to get it right the first shot, but you'll eventually roll down the gradually sloped pit of success. In JS, by contrast, doing things the right way tends to look almost like an abuse of the language.
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
They weren't considered such by anyone with any expertise. If he has some he should have said "Falsely considered ..." Or people might think less of his own analysis. People might be wrong to think so due to poor communication on his part..?
Anyone downvoting this might do better to explain why lisp garbage collection sucked and why so many people claimed it didn't before java was thought of. Downvoting rather than replying is lame. This is a respectful comment. Note also I deliberately used direct quotes. If they are unfair please find something that isn't vague to demonstrate that. Edit: Noting more downvotes received and no more replies. Is this langu…
I don't know why you're getting downvoted, but I do think people are disagreeing with you simply because their experience is like mine. These concepts weren't truly novel when they went mainstream in the 2000s, but they were new to many.
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anyone downvoting this might do better to explain why lisp garbage collection sucked and why so many people claimed it didn't before java was thought of. Downvoting rather than replying is lame. This is a respectful comment. Note also I deliberately used direct quotes. If they are unfair please find something that isn't vague to demonstrate that. Edit: Noting more downvotes received and no more replies. Is this langu…
As someone who started programming as a teenager in the 90s, Lisp wasn't on my radar until the mid-2000s. I think you have to acknowledge that regardless of what the Lisp/academic scene had accomplished, these advances simply hadn't made it to mainstream development. To me, there's truth in the talk, because it mirrors what I experienced, although I know actual history to be different in the broadest sense. I know no…
Guy Steele is a genuine programming language expert who designed Scheme with Gerry Sussman, wrote the standard common lisp texts, the C reference manual and so on.
"We were not out to win over the Lisp programmers; we were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of them about halfway to Lisp."
- Guy Steele, Java spec co-author
http://www.paulgraham.com/quotes.html
I'm not claiming expertise on Java, VMs, Lisp and programming languages in general and don't pretend to be. I've picked up that much but Mr Eckel hasn't. So does that fact that he has missed such a basic count for the expertise of this presentation on programming languages or against it? But maybe Mr Eckel has a lot friends who like to downvote any criticism of his presentation however reasoned and respectful? Maybe he's a lovely guy and mostly does a lot better?
edit: minor spelling & grammar
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#37I'm disagree with his comparison of scala community to "league of legends". I've found the scala community, especially, the #scala IRC to be friendliest so far. Folks are always there to help you out irrespective of your level of proficiency with language or programming in general
I second that, I don't know where he went, but at least in reddit.com/r/scala people are very nice and helpful, and Martin Odersky visits there frequently and answers questions. I was in touch with several people in the community and from typesafe / EPFL and really don't know where the league of legends comparison comes from. In any case, I do suggest anyone who haven't seen or tried Scala to give it a shot. It's a f…
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really? I don't think he has been constantly chasing the hot thingy in the past 10 years, stuff like Ruby/Rails, Coffeescript, Clojure, Kotlin, Node, Typescript, F#, Go, Rust, Nim, Elixir, Meteor ...
He was C++, then Java, then he was C++ again then he was Python... Then he wrote about Flex, and now Scala...
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who started programming as a teenager in the 90s, Lisp wasn't on my radar until the mid-2000s. I think you have to acknowledge that regardless of what the Lisp/academic scene had accomplished, these advances simply hadn't made it to mainstream development. To me, there's truth in the talk, because it mirrors what I experienced, although I know actual history to be different in the broadest sense. I know no…
That's entirely reasonable. But we're talking about someone who is being held up as an expert not knowing better. I'm told (I wasn't there either) that Lisp had considerable traction in commercial implementations in the enterprise before java was thought of. Dick Gabriel says so, he was there. So does Jamie Zawiniski who was also there and there are a few others so I think on the balance of probability that it's prob…
Mostly on a few American companies.
Lisp Machines were hardly known outside US.
I heard about them at the university for the first time, in the mid-90's and I was already coding since the mid-80's.
Also on the university I got to learn about Smalltalk, Prolog, Caml Light, Oberon, Modula-3. All languages with GC, some of them used for system programing which is still considered an heresy today.
At least on my home country all those languages were considered esoteric by the average developer and seen as something that one is required to use while at university.
I got to learn about them, because one of my focus at the university was in compiler design, so I got to read a lot about language design.
The average programmer without a degree? Not so.
Re: Bruce Eckel: Rethinking Scala
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Java was not the first, he's touting Java as the first. It wasn't. while you're saying java wasn't even that, it was actually slow as. So we're really not disagreeing here.
> Java was not the first, he's touting Java as the first. He did not say this. You are imagining it. Re-watch the video if you don't believe me. You're getting tripped up by the fact that he's talking about popular languages, not languages in general. Java was the first time most of the people who only ever did their work in C and C++ encountered virtual machines and garbage collection.
UCSD Pascal (which was widely known in the 80s) had a virtual machine, but no GC.
Maclisp had GC, but no virtual machine.