A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
joshuakehn.com
A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
1–10 of 57 posts
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#2Nice. I just wrote a followup to Ted's post myself: http://blog.brianbeck.com/post/node-js-cures-cancer
I couldn't believe when folks on Twitter seemed to be buying his "argument."
(Apologies for the self-promotion. I had literally just published mine when I saw this.)
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#3Nice. I just wrote a followup to Ted's post myself: http://blog.brianbeck.com/post/node-js-cures-cancer I couldn't believe when folks on Twitter seemed to be buying his "argument." (Apologies for the self-promotion. I had literally just published mine when I saw this.)
For those post "Yes, it def is cancer" without spend several minutes doing a test themselves, yes, Node is a cancer... cause you cannot resist cancer.
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#4Nice. I just wrote a followup to Ted's post myself: http://blog.brianbeck.com/post/node-js-cures-cancer I couldn't believe when folks on Twitter seemed to be buying his "argument." (Apologies for the self-promotion. I had literally just published mine when I saw this.)
For those post "Yes, it def is cancer" without spend several minutes doing a test themselves, yes, Node is a cancer... cause you cannot resist cancer.
[deleted]
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#5> He contests that because a shitty Fibonacci number generator performs poorly Node.js is worthless. I contend that shitty Fibonacci generators are shitty in whatever language or framework.
I don't think he contends that. He was just using Fibonacci as an example to show that IO is not the only way to block a process. Although he doesn't go into it, this issue is one thing that you have to weigh when you decide to use eventing instead of threads: can you break up any potentially long running computation to maintain availability?
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#6I like node.js, but this post completely misunderstands "Node.js is Cancer". The point of that post isn't that node.js is slow; its point is that node.js does concurrency, but not parallelism; i.e., if your code is CPU-bound, it can only serve one request at a time.
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#7Is there a reason that these examples are using some sort of deeply nested call stack? Is it just to enforce 'slowness' in the function calls?
def fibonacci(n):
a,b = 0,1
for i in range(0,n):
a,b, = b,a+b
return b
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#8I like node.js, but this post completely misunderstands "Node.js is Cancer". The point of that post isn't that node.js is slow; its point is that node.js does concurrency, but not parallelism; i.e., if your code is CPU-bound, it can only serve one request at a time.
there is a good post about this on stack overflow... that parallelism in nodejs is more of a hack.. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4631774/coordinating-para...
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#9Is there a reason that these examples are using some sort of deeply nested call stack? Is it just to enforce 'slowness' in the function calls? def fibonacci(n): a,b = 0,1 for i in range(0,n): a,b, = b,a+b return b (cadged from zacharyfox.com) performs far, far better than the nested function calls. I imagine it would in javascript as well. In python at least, all that function calling infrastructure is relatively exp…
It's just a canonical form; it's far easier (IMHO) for a beginner to understand a recursively written Fibonacci number computer than your function.
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#10I strongly disagree with what Ted wrote, but I really wish he would come out and enter a dialog with the community. There's a thread on the mailing list, twitter, and blog responses floating around now, but no substantial effort by Ted to respond to or even acknowledge the replies he's received.