Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > Java 8 closures vs. anonymous inner classes

Reply
Thread Tools

Java 8 closures vs. anonymous inner classes

 
 
Arved Sandstrom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-15-2013
On 12/14/2013 06:00 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 12/14/2013 2:13 AM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>> On 12/04/2013 03:07 PM, Sebastian wrote:
>>> 3) lambdas perform better due to the use of the invokedynamic JVM
>>> instruction. Type representation, instance creation, and invocation
>>> strategy are decided at runtime. This offers optimization potentials,
>>> because evaluating a lambda expression need not create a new instance
>>> each time. There could be „shared lambdas“ through use of a constant
>>> static method in a constant pool, needing no new class and/or new
>>> object.

>>
>> To put it bluntly, who cares? The last time I ran into a speed
>> bottleneck with any language was over a decade ago.

>
>> and they won't even understand
>> what the hell you are talking about wrt your third point: most
>> developers work M-F 9-5 and don't have the time nor the inclination to
>> get particularly good at their profession.

>
> This sounds a bit contradictory to me.
>
> Arne
>

No aspersion on the M-F 9-5 programmers, Arne. But by definition M-F 9-5
programmers have made a decision - not something I will heavily
criticize - to confine their work to work hours, and keep their free
time for family and leisure. As such they don't spend nearly as much
time on off-hours professional education (if any), and we all know that
work hours don't lend themselves to professional education either.

So my point really had to do with the fact that we often don't learn
much new stuff on the job. Most of my career - for my M-F 9-5
engagements - I've had to work on stuff that's well behind the power
curve, because that's what clients use. I've yet to run across a client
in my region that was willing to use JVM languages other than Java, and
I expect I'll have the luxury of using Java 8 extensively maybe in the
year 2016.

Let's also not forget, who has the time to focus just on Java or its
ecosystem? I don't, and I spend way too much of my free time on software
development. Only speaking for myself, but I also have to keep track of
what's happening with other languages, and libraries, and tools, and I
seriously don't have the luxury of examining the intricacies of Java
bytecode. I doubt that M-F 9-5 coders do.

AHS
--
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
-- Jonathan Swift
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Arved Sandstrom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2013
On 12/17/2013 03:09 PM, Wanja Gayk wrote:
> In article <g4nru.546685$(E-Mail Removed)>, Arved Sandstrom
> ((E-Mail Removed)) says...
>
>> No aspersion on the M-F 9-5 programmers, Arne. But by definition M-F 9-5
>> programmers have made a decision - not something I will heavily
>> criticize - to confine their work to work hours, and keep their free
>> time for family and leisure. As such they don't spend nearly as much
>> time on off-hours professional education (if any), and we all know that
>> work hours don't lend themselves to professional education either.

>
> To put it bluntly, this is nonsense. You can't generalize like that.


Sure I can generalize like that. When I refer to a programmer as a M-F
9-5 programmer, it's not a slur, it's a straightforward definition of a
programmer who only practices his trade M-F 9-5. It then follows - from
the definition - that they don't study programming on their own time.
I'm not making a value judgment here, I'm objectively stating that there
are software developers with different priorities.

> I do work M-F 9-5, but I do take my time on the job to educate myself
> from time to time, simply because it is part of my job to know what I'm
> doing.


We all do, within reason. Note the "within reason": there is knowledge
that it's OK to acquire on employer time, and knowledge that isn't.

But as soon as I'm at home, I've seen enough code for the day,
> except maybe some nice video, book or presentation on programming
> catches my attention.


That's fine. It may even be a healthy approach. I wasn't busting on M-F
9-5 programmers per se. If you can execute on the job no employer cares
whether you spend your time watching football or perusing programming
articles.

> On the other hand I've seen self-employed consultants who don't give a
> flying **** about the quality of their work, they come into a project,
> get it to work just well enough to not cause major mayhem, and leave a
> pile of stinking source code behind for the next one to deal with it,
> while they enjoy puking into the next customer's version control system.
> Not my kind of work ethics, I might add.
>
> W
>

Not my kind of work ethics either. In my experience however you've got
that kind of person equally represented amongst self-employed
consultants, company-employed consultants, and straight in-house employees.

AHS
--
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
-- Jonathan Swift
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Joerg Meier
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2013
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 11:54:10 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:

> Who works 9-5?


> I never had a job where I worked 9-5


> [...]


> 9-5 developers?
> No such thing.


According to this logic, the country of Mexico is entirely fictional. No
such thing. Since I've never been there nor met someone from there.

The vast majority of programmers that I know IRL work their jobs 9-5.

Liebe Gruesse,
Joerg

--
Ich lese meine Emails nicht, replies to Email bleiben also leider
ungelesen.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Arved Sandstrom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2013
On 12/21/2013 07:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 21/12/13 02:28, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>> On 12/17/2013 03:09 PM, Wanja Gayk wrote:
>>> In article <g4nru.546685$(E-Mail Removed)>, Arved Sandstrom
>>> ((E-Mail Removed)) says...
>>>
>>>> No aspersion on the M-F 9-5 programmers, Arne. But by definition M-F
>>>> 9-5
>>>> programmers have made a decision - not something I will heavily
>>>> criticize - to confine their work to work hours, and keep their free
>>>> time for family and leisure. As such they don't spend nearly as much
>>>> time on off-hours professional education (if any), and we all know that
>>>> work hours don't lend themselves to professional education either.
>>>
>>> To put it bluntly, this is nonsense. You can't generalize like that.

>>
>> Sure I can generalize like that. When I refer to a programmer as a M-F
>> 9-5 programmer, it's not a slur, it's a straightforward definition of a
>> programmer who only practices his trade M-F 9-5.

>
> <snip>
>
> Who works 9-5?
>
> I never had a job where I worked 9-5
>
> 8-6 minimum plus any unpaid overtime required to get the job done by
> release date. Then there are the nights (or small part thereof) spent in
> the company flat sleeping on the floor because some suit said we could
> do so and so by such and such and now we are working until we drop while
> he sleeps at home with his wife, or mistress.
>
> Then there's the time spent crammed up against some herbert who could do
> with a bath, on an overcrowded train, waiting for the upline to become
> available and swotting up for the latest Java certification.
>
> Or spending your weekends getting your head around some shitty new
> framework that some **** decided was the latest greatest waste of time
> that would look good on his CV, whilst your kids are growing up and you
> are missing the best time of their lives.
>
> Or trying to learn some pointlessly complicated XML at 11.00pm on a
> weeknight, or ... or ... or ...
>
> 9-5 developers?
> No such thing.
>
>

Then you've certainly not ever been in a union, for starters.

And you've evidently never worked in a private sector company (like IBM
or Oracle or Microsoft, for example, or well-established local software
consultancies with lucrative long-term contracts) where usually the only
reason you work outside hours is because you're self-motivated, not
because anyone required you to do so.

For what it's worth, I wasn't referring to occasional "incompetency"
time. As in, some manager f**ks up, and you kill a weekend and some
evenings to repair his mistake. Even union people have to do
that...although they get overtime. I meant independent un-coerced
decisions to sacrifice family time or personal recreational
opportunities in order to swot up on SOA, and suchlike. Not as many
people do that as you may think. And they may be mentally healthier for it.

AHS
--
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
-- Jonathan Swift
 
Reply With Quote
 
Tim Slattery
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2013
lipska the kat <"lipskathekat at yahoo dot co dot uk"> wrote:


>I don't know any 9-5 developers so don't recognize the idiom '9-5 developer'


I'm recently retired after working 40 years as a developer. My hours
for the whole time were 8:15 - 4:45. Not exactly 9-5, but the same
general idea, I think. Yes, there was overtime sometimes, but not a
lot.

--
Tim Slattery
tim <at> risingdove <dot> com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Stefan Ram
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2013
Tim Slattery <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>lipska the kat <"lipskathekat at yahoo dot co dot uk"> wrote:
>>I don't know any 9-5 developers so don't recognize the idiom '9-5 developer'

>I'm recently retired after working 40 years as a developer. My hours
>for the whole time were 8:15 - 4:45. Not exactly 9-5, but the same
>general idea, I think. Yes, there was overtime sometimes, but not a
>lot.


To read an intriguing article about 9-5 programmers, you all have to
search the web for an article called They write the right stuff.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Arved Sandstrom
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-21-2013
On 12/21/2013 03:35 PM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 21/12/13 18:52, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>> On 12/21/2013 07:54 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 21/12/13 02:28, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>>>> On 12/17/2013 03:09 PM, Wanja Gayk wrote:
>>>>> In article <g4nru.546685$(E-Mail Removed)>, Arved Sandstrom
>>>>> ((E-Mail Removed)) says...
>>>>>
>>>>>> No aspersion on the M-F 9-5 programmers, Arne. But by definition M-F
>>>>>> 9-5
>>>>>> programmers have made a decision - not something I will heavily
>>>>>> criticize - to confine their work to work hours, and keep their free
>>>>>> time for family and leisure. As such they don't spend nearly as much
>>>>>> time on off-hours professional education (if any), and we all know
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> work hours don't lend themselves to professional education either.
>>>>>
>>>>> To put it bluntly, this is nonsense. You can't generalize like that.
>>>>
>>>> Sure I can generalize like that. When I refer to a programmer as a M-F
>>>> 9-5 programmer, it's not a slur, it's a straightforward definition of a
>>>> programmer who only practices his trade M-F 9-5.
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> Who works 9-5?

>
> <snip>
>
>>> 9-5 developers?
>>> No such thing.
>>>
>>>

>> Then you've certainly not ever been in a union, for starters.
>>
>> And you've evidently never worked in a private sector company (like IBM
>> or Oracle or Microsoft, for example, or well-established local software
>> consultancies with lucrative long-term contracts) where usually the only
>> reason you work outside hours is because you're self-motivated, not
>> because anyone required you to do so.

>
> I did work for a large company once. Company car, company mobile,
> company laptop ... multiple layers of management, bored stiff.
>
> Start-ups was my thing. Design, prototype, implement, launch, get bored,
> move on.
>
> How can you be a developer without being self-motivated?
>


Hey, I'm with you here. Software development for me is not just a job,
and my bookshelves, professional activities, and the occasional
irritation of my wife prove it. Actually, the fact that I have been in
this NG so long must mean something...seeing as how way less than one
hundredth of one percent of Java developers engage in earnest discourse
in Usenet Java programming groups.

I'm not quite at the startup stage anymore...I've been through two that
failed terribly, and several others that have survived but are probably
not poised for IPOs or buyouts by IBM. You get to a certain age and you
enjoy a bit of stability.

AHS
--
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign:
that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
-- Jonathan Swift
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anonymous inner classes Jon Harrop Java 6 01-26-2007 07:24 AM
failing to instantiate an inner class because of order of inner classes Pyenos Python 2 12-27-2006 11:19 PM
Design patterns using anonymous inner classes Scott Simpson Java 8 01-13-2006 03:35 AM
anonymous inner classes and final variables VisionSet Java 4 12-05-2003 09:15 PM
inner classes in python as inner classes in Java Carlo v. Dango Python 14 10-19-2003 08:49 AM



Advertisments