Java/C# vs Rust
Java/C# vs Rust
Posted Aug 19, 2024 13:39 UTC (Mon) by khim (subscriber, #9252)In reply to: Java/C# vs Rust by pizza
Parent article: Standards for use of unsafe Rust in the kernel
> New stuff only rarely replaces the old stuff; instead it's layered on top. It's turtles all the way down.
> And again, it is a simple FACT that Java is vastly more approachable than the stuff it supplanted
Can you stop contradicting yourself at least in two adjacent sentences?
> Multiple generations of ARM processors ran the Java bytecode nativelyNope. Few ARMv5 CPUs has the ability to run some small subset of Java bytecode. It was, basically, to run few games on some phones and for nothing else. Starting from ARMv6 only “null” implementation of Jazelle is supported.
So that's another example of pointless waste (thankfully very limited compared to the damage caused by the large C#/Java crazyness).
> Completely supplanting Pascal in introductory programming coursesYeah. And also Scheme in some course. Another negative.
> That was a *HUGE* change over the former status quo.Where do you see me objecting? Sure, C#/Java caused lots of changes. Almost all of them negative.
But you are arguing as if I'm objecting about magnitude of change… I'm not! C#/Java caused absolutely huge negative change.
There were, also, some minuscule positive changes, sure, but compared to problems that C#/Java craze caused they are hard to even notice.
> Sure, many of its use cases have since been better served with newer stuff.That's not important. What is important is that almost all use cases are better served by older stuff.
> Isn't that the fate of all technology?Sure. But C#/Java is different: that's the rare case where bad technology was replaced with worse one.
Wanted to say that it's the only such change, but nope, there are many other like that: solar and win power plants, electric cars, etc. That have only started happening recently. About quarter century ago. But, sadly, it's not limited to IT and not limited to C#/Java. True.
But the fact that was achieved by temporary disconnect between feasibility of technology and availability of funding doesn't make that change good and we would pay for that stupidity, and, it looks like, rather sooner than later.
Microsoft and Sun have already paid the price, but I doubt it would be limited to that.
The LWN site is currently under high scraper load, so comment display has been suppressed for anonymous users. If you are a human, you may read the comments by clicking the button below:
Note: you can avoid this step in the future by logging into your LWN account.
