You made a good point: not many people are aware of the fact that the implementation of fibonacci number by Ted is just wrong.
Of course it's completely irrelevant to the actual debate at hand.
A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
51–57 of 57 posts
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#52This response misses the point, which is just that it's trivial to show that you can write blocking code in node. Any program that does significant computation will still block and pause all network IO (without setting up side processes, etc.). "The stupid fibonacci benchmark" is just a cliche way to chew up the CPU. My main beef with node.js is the hype, to be honest. Many of the people who are really excited about…
Virtually every request made to the server is blocking. The point of a server request is to retrieve/store data, process it, and respond. That's a blocking operation by definition. I can't respond before processing the data. I can't process it before retrieving it. You get the picture. The neat thing about node.js isn't that it's "non-blocking" ... every major HTTP server out there is "non-blocking" in the same way.…
Indeed. I think that's a big part of the actual reason for its popularity. This "ultra scalable" stuff has helped to draw attention to it, though.
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#53To be honest, most of his blog posts seem to be inflammatory in nature with a cute picture at the top. I wouldn't be surprised if Ted wrote it merely to get blog views.
I put Ted squarely in the category of "contrarian" rather than troll. I think it's important to have people calling out the Emperor for having no clothes, even if the Emperor is wearing clothes. It makes for debate, which in turn makes for reasoned decision making.
He's abrasive, true, but often has a point. See e.g. "The Blocking Consumer" part in "The Case Against Queues" (http://teddziuba.com/2011/02/the-case-against-queues.html) and "Stupid Unix Tricks: Workflow Control with GNU Make" (http://teddziuba.com/2011/02/stupid-unix-tricks-workflow-con...).
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#54It should be noted that the Python code example runs in 4.038s on PyPy. Standard Python: 1:07.31 :)
pypy 1.6: 5.0 sec
python 2.6: 58.2 sec
python 2.7: 49.8 sec
python 3.2: 51.4 sec
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#55Poor flower doesn't get it -- Node.js is a cancer, and Ruby is dead.
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#56He totally misunderstands node's reason for existence, and also why it can be awesome. His preferred infrastructure (once I cut through the swagger) is: Highly-tuned request dispatch --> multiple processing threads (or processes) --> back out to requesting client For certain workloads, e.g. long-polling, pubsub or high-number-of-client workloads, unix dispatch overhead is actually very significant. One cannot instant…
Node is straight up cancer. Get over it.
Also, I think you mean "boxes", bro.
Re: A response to Node.js is cancer - The Diagnosis
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
he's responded here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3065098 with the same attitude he displayed in his original blog post. Not sure there's much point entering a dialog with him.
When you wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty, but the pig likes it. Dziuba is the very paradigm of an ill-informed lazy troll. He has made his reputation giving other lazy people reasons to not learn new things.
umad, bro?