As an example and reminder for those of us who haven't worked in C++ for a
while, take this bug from hypertable:
Defect Accepted Medium ---- nuggetwheat
Rangeserver crashes if system clock is forwarded.
The rangeserver *crashes* if you change the clock?!?!
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The conclusion as stated was "It is just almost always worthwhile...". I
> think we both agree that anymore that the conclusion by be "There still
> exist a few instances where it is worthwhile..". The question is when.
>
> My take on the issue is that Hadoop would be completely moribund if it had
> been developed in C++ because it would have been non-portable and would now
> be stuck in a morass of segment faults. Not to mention that using C++ would
> have meant that Hadoop would have had to make do without Doug C. Java's
> virtues in terms of safety are particularly valuable in a community
> project. Conversely, C++'s defects are particularly egregious and dangerous
> in the same setting.
>
>
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Er, isn't it right fact, conclusion that was really right then and
>> remains a little right now? it is the same reason indeed.
>>
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:01 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Right fact (google based their map-reduce on c++), wrong conclusion.
>> >
>> > A simpler motivating factor was simply when Google did it. In 2001 or
>> so,
>> > Java was definitely much less competitive.
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:18 AM, Sean Owen <srowen@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> For reference, of course, Google operates at such a scale that they
>> >> use a C++-based MapReduce framework. It is just almost always
>> >> worthwhile to spend the time to beat Java performance.
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ted Dunning, CTO
> DeepDyve
> =
|