From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,c7b637f8b783b7c X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,c7b637f8b783b7c X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,c7b637f8b783b7c X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 107d55,c7b637f8b783b7c X-Google-Attributes: gid107d55,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,c7b637f8b783b7c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,c7b637f8b783b7c X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Bert Bril Subject: Re: The great Java showcase (re: 2nd historic mistake) Date: 1997/08/30 Message-ID: <340823D5.221@dgb.nl>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 269178606 References: <34023FC9.59E2B600@eiffel.com> <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com> <01bcb38a$8ddc1200$1c10d30a@ntwneil> <3405F547.9B50CB98@pagesmiths.com> Organization: dGB Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.java.tech,comp.lang.c++ Date: 1997-08-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: James P. White wrote: > > Robert Dewar wrote: > > > > James P. White wrote in article > > <3404670B.C3A2C4A2@pagesmiths.com>... > > > Even though Java lacks anything as comprehensive as DBC, in our > > > experience the simple matter of having automatic memory management and > > > pointer protection has yielded a productivity boost of several hundred > > > percent. > > > > If automatic memory management really cut down your development time by > > a factor of several, I hate to think of what on earth you were doing to > > waste that much time previously. Sure memory management problems can be > > persnickety, but if they are taking up 80% of your time, something is > > VERY wrong with the way you are writing programs. > > Yes, there is something VERY wrong with the way most programmers (not me > of course) write programs. So, do the programmers decide not to use GC? That _is_ a major problem. Because it's a design issue. And if the boost of GC is so large somewhere, then they should get GC immediately there. For any serious language there is GC available nowadays. And, e.g., in C++ you can now even choose which parts you want to handle manually, and which part not (see e.g. http://www.geodesic.com ). It's always the same story. People find themselves in a badly managed environment with bad QA, bad Design, bad everything. And then, of course, the language is to blame. Java may be the best choice for a lot of situations. But the evaluation of whether it is the best should be kept separated from these managerial problems. If you have no QA: make sure you get that first. You'll not make good software using Java then, either. Bert -- de Groot - Bril Earth Sciences B.V. -- Boulevard 1945 - 24, 7511 AE Enschede, The Netherlands -- mailto:bert@dgb.nl , http://www.dgb.nl -- Tel: +31 534315155 , Fax: +31 534315104