Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
blog.paralleluniverse.co
Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
1–10 of 49 posts
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#2Saying Quasar supports Kotlin/Clojure as though Akka does not (considering both languages interop with Java) is unfair. There is a difference between bytecode manipulation making alternative JVM languages impossible vs just not having a language-idiomatic wrapper.
There a few other parts I take slight umbrage with (e.g. pretending Akka is heavyweight, has deployment rules, incomplete integration information, etc) but overall a nice informative comparison if a tad biased feeling.
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#3Saying Quasar supports Kotlin/Clojure as though Akka does not (considering both languages interop with Java) is unfair. There is a difference between bytecode manipulation making alternative JVM languages impossible vs just not having a language-idiomatic wrapper. There a few other parts I take slight umbrage with (e.g. pretending Akka is heavyweight, has deployment rules, incomplete integration information, etc) but…
Some of it is definitely misleading. Saying that Akka forces you into a logging library when it can be used with log4j, logback, provides a bridge with slf4j, etc, is just being uncharitable. As is claiming that "commercial tools" are needed for monitoring when JMX can be used just as with Quasar. Same with labeling Akka's clustering support as "experimental". Akka dropped that status from the clustering module a while ago (I had it in production for over a year).
I get that it's marketing material so it's going to be biased but I can't help but feel that one too many liberties were taken in making Quasar look good.
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#4Saying Quasar supports Kotlin/Clojure as though Akka does not (considering both languages interop with Java) is unfair. There is a difference between bytecode manipulation making alternative JVM languages impossible vs just not having a language-idiomatic wrapper. There a few other parts I take slight umbrage with (e.g. pretending Akka is heavyweight, has deployment rules, incomplete integration information, etc) but…
Some of it is definitely misleading. Saying that Akka forces you into a logging library when it can be used with log4j, logback, provides a bridge with slf4j, etc, is just being uncharitable. As is claiming that "commercial tools" are needed for monitoring when JMX can be used just as with Quasar. Same with labeling Akka's clustering support as "experimental". Akka dropped that status from the clustering module a whi…
This is most evident in the conclusion: "Akka [...] is a totalizing choice", "blocking is free", "Akka [...] the way to go if [...] you have embraced Scala", "Akka [...] betting on a framework and sticking with it [...] high rewrite price", on and on. In retrospect I would remove "a tad" from the last sentence of my original post.
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#5Seems like a very one sided comparison. Most other posts from paralleluniverse have also come off this way.
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#6Seems like a very one sided comparison. Most other posts from paralleluniverse have also come off this way.
Anytime I see "Not needed" instead of "No" in a feature comparison chart, I am inclined to just stop reading.
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#7Saying Quasar supports Kotlin/Clojure as though Akka does not (considering both languages interop with Java) is unfair. There is a difference between bytecode manipulation making alternative JVM languages impossible vs just not having a language-idiomatic wrapper. There a few other parts I take slight umbrage with (e.g. pretending Akka is heavyweight, has deployment rules, incomplete integration information, etc) but…
Actually bytecode manipulation doesn't make JVM alternative languages impossible, on the opposite Quasar allows them to be easily integrated and investigation/work is ongoing to avoid even having to do that. Plus, depending on the language implementation, in some cases integration is just not needed.
Of course you can use Akka with Kotlin (and Clojure, although not sure how convenient that would be) but there's no idiomatic API (yet?), while Quasar offers them.
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some of it is definitely misleading. Saying that Akka forces you into a logging library when it can be used with log4j, logback, provides a bridge with slf4j, etc, is just being uncharitable. As is claiming that "commercial tools" are needed for monitoring when JMX can be used just as with Quasar. Same with labeling Akka's clustering support as "experimental". Akka dropped that status from the clustering module a whi…
This is most evident in the conclusion: "Akka [...] is a totalizing choice", "blocking is free", "Akka [...] the way to go if [...] you have embraced Scala", "Akka [...] betting on a framework and sticking with it [...] high rewrite price", on and on. In retrospect I would remove "a tad" from the last sentence of my original post.
[deleted]
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#9Saying Quasar supports Kotlin/Clojure as though Akka does not (considering both languages interop with Java) is unfair. There is a difference between bytecode manipulation making alternative JVM languages impossible vs just not having a language-idiomatic wrapper. There a few other parts I take slight umbrage with (e.g. pretending Akka is heavyweight, has deployment rules, incomplete integration information, etc) but…
Some of it is definitely misleading. Saying that Akka forces you into a logging library when it can be used with log4j, logback, provides a bridge with slf4j, etc, is just being uncharitable. As is claiming that "commercial tools" are needed for monitoring when JMX can be used just as with Quasar. Same with labeling Akka's clustering support as "experimental". Akka dropped that status from the clustering module a whi…
[deleted]
Re: Quasar and Akka – a Comparison
#10Saying Quasar supports Kotlin/Clojure as though Akka does not (considering both languages interop with Java) is unfair. There is a difference between bytecode manipulation making alternative JVM languages impossible vs just not having a language-idiomatic wrapper. There a few other parts I take slight umbrage with (e.g. pretending Akka is heavyweight, has deployment rules, incomplete integration information, etc) but…
Some of it is definitely misleading. Saying that Akka forces you into a logging library when it can be used with log4j, logback, provides a bridge with slf4j, etc, is just being uncharitable. As is claiming that "commercial tools" are needed for monitoring when JMX can be used just as with Quasar. Same with labeling Akka's clustering support as "experimental". Akka dropped that status from the clustering module a whi…
Actually the statement about logging is a bit different and says that Akka offers an additional logging API, which is correct I believe, and I think this is unnecessary since a pre-existing one could be used.
As for clustering it's probably just an error in the table, thanks for pointing it out, I'll fix it.
As for JMX, I didn't find info about non-cluster metrics, although there seem to be some 3rd-party projects to get more, but maybe I missed something. Do you have pointers?