Quote from dcraig:
Why does this nonsense resurface every now and then ? And why is it so woefully misinformed ? And why does anybody with any common sense expect IB to rewrite TWS in C#/C++/Python or anything else without providing any real evidence of any problem that would be solved by doing so when the costs and risks of doing so would be substantial.
The "stop creeping featureism, I don't want features, I want stability" brigade should be having fits at any such suggestion and the risk to stability that it implies but I'll bet there are some of the Java bashers/rewrite TWS crowd amongst them too.
Lets take a look at some of the so called "arguments" -
1. The myth of slow performance. If anybody can demonstrate inadequate performance then they should go ahead and do so. I've yet to see it. The reality is that response time in transmitting an order or getting a price/bid/offer update is less than an order of magnitude less than data comms latency and is therefore irrelevant. If there was a performance issue, then you can see it in CPU utilization with task manager in Windows. But nobody ever cites CPU utilization as an issue - basically because it isn't.
2. Memory. 50 - 70 Mb is not excessive on a modern PC. Memory now costs less than $100 per gig. This is a non-issue.
3. Stability. Current JVMs are quite stable and reliable. It is absolutely not true that they are buggy to the point of compromising the stability of TWS. Anybody banging on the stability issue is years behind current reality. Anybody with evidence (rather than hearsay) to the contrary please step forward.
4. Java is dying. Absolute rubbish. Just look at the number of jobs advertised for Java developers.
As with many things in life using Java is a compromise but as far as I can see, it is the right compromise. IB should be applauded for cross platform support and I expect it will not drive customers away by abandoning it. If you want cross platform support then there are limited choices available. C++/QT is suggested and excellent as QT may be there are very few programmers with QT experience. This is a very serious consideration for any organisation especially in this type of environment. What if key developers leave ? Where are you going to find replacements that can hit the ground running ? Even very good people will take some time to learn. Python/QT has the exactly the same problem with the added issue of a question mark over performance. Java is backed by SUN, IBM, Oracle and so on. This is important to IT managers. There is no other cross platform environment that enjoys this level of support.
The reality is that the only realistic options are Java, or being locked into Microsoft. IB has made a correct decision with Java.
.
Hi Craig,
You bring up a lot of points. I didn't bother to check, but I can't get away from the idea that you are a 'happy' Java user - many are. True or not, Java's fortunes don't have anything to do with this. I don't even have to bother with either refuting or disproving your points. This all has been done as I pointed out already.
"Beyond Java", by Bruce Tate at O'Reilly Sept 2005, ISBN 0-596-10094-9. In fact, many highly experienced software engineers state their views in this book. Interestingly, in Chapter 1. "Owls and Ostriches", the first section is titled: "1.1 Ignorance as a Virtue". (I don't want to imply that this applies to most posting here, but it could.)
Java has known a great defection of top level talent the last 1-2 years. Its reign will probably be over in another 2 years. Don't panic if you are attached too much to it. It's still going to be around as an oldtimer for some time.
As to the self-styled "professional" posters, styling themselves as fatherly know-all figures using arguments like IB is an amazingly well managed company - let me add, that I don't doubt this - all this has absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand. There are other amazingly well managed companies in the USA which seem to run in the exact track mapped out by the "Beyond Java" book. (In fact one is the darling of Wall Street and some ET people can't stop posting about how the price of their stock is keeping on shooting up. Some must know better.
)
Let me add that I don't see everything 100% as Bruce Tate though. He basically sees Ruby and Python as very similar vehicles pointing the way to the future language-wise. Why? Takes a bid of study but Bruce does a good job on this. He kind of goes for Ruby, me for Python. I will be happy either way. In fact I run Ruby as well simply to keep ready. If I would have to switch one day, it will be far less traumatizing than to move from X to Y. Let me add that Google picked Python as its workhorse quite some time ago.
Now all the 'Performance' and other lover's arguments in favor of their pets. A lot to be said about this. Roughly: C/C++ 10,000 LOC (lines of code), Java 5,000 LOC, Ruby, Python 2,000 LOC (less depending on how you count). (C# is no more than a kind of a Java clone). This brings out the fact that C/C++, Java etc all belong in the 'High Clutter' category, i.e. a programmer has to peck a lot of redundant characters into his keyboard in order to come up with the same result. As program-bug-devils love complexity, 5 times as much crap can easily result in 25+ times more programmer time to come up with a running solution. Interestingly, studies of programmer productivity regularly done since the assembler stone-age of computing kind of indicate that a programmer's day-output in LOC is amazingly constant. Ruby-Python are reputed to be about 10 times more productive in programmer's time.
Then there is the crap about 'slowness'. It is not difficult to write a bit of code to show how bad interpreted languages are doing. You can do this for Java as well, btw. All this has nothing to do with the performance of the actual application. You simply never run that kind of dummy proof code in an application. Ruby-Python as programmed by the user is kind of a glue language stiching together library code. In fact this is the case for 99+% in most applications written in any language - some do much better than others though.
Much more can be said about all this. I kind of did in the past already. Nobody pulled it all nicely together like Bruce. Nobody can afford not to answer these questions: YES or NO.
One more thing. How do you forecast the future in computing? Look back a bit: Changes always come and when they come, they were not expected by most and surprise many. Bragging about 'great management' and other wailing doesn't help - Didn't lill' BG at one time not manage to even fool those pro-pillars of "well-managing-IBM" fat cats? IBM, DEC, Sun (,M$
) have seen many who believed to keep on floating on cloud seven all the way till their pensions.
If you want to survive, be prepared. Don't be an attached cash cow to be milked. That's the essence of the OSS message. I don't want to add anything more about the wisdom/security/stability of W (a.o.) platforms. Make sure you are platform independent, so may you reach retirement age in peace.
nononsense
, but I try not to fall asleep.