Java runtime intranet installation? [found it, sort of]
-
Phil Martin... wrote:
Every time I hear someone say "Threaded programming is easy!" or "I know all about that threading stuff", I just cry a little inside.
Shucks, y'oughtn'ta cry over exaggeration and braggadocio, 's just the way some people communicate! Sure threads aren't easy, nothing worthwhile in this game is easy... the point is, it is worthwhile. I shudder though, every time i hear someone discouraged from using threads because "they're hard". So what? Usable UIs are hard, reliable command parsers are hard, robust network communication is hard, reliable serialization is hard, programming is hard. But oh, so useful. :)
----
Yes, but can you blame them for doing so if that's the only legal way they can hire programmers they want at the rate they can afford?
-- Nish on sketchy hiring practices
I'm totally with you on that one. I encourage just about everyone I meet to use concurrency, and boy do I get some strange looks from the McDonalds staff. They'll thank me one day though :) It is very worth while, and I don't design any system now without a fundamental underpinning of concurrency. And I probably stuff it up more often than not, but hey, it's all good fun. And I never want to discourage people, I just want people to be aware it isn't the easiest thing in the world, and you should respect them threadsies. And you are right, writing most anything in a really robust way automatically makes it hard! I also have italics envy. - Phil
-
I'm totally with you on that one. I encourage just about everyone I meet to use concurrency, and boy do I get some strange looks from the McDonalds staff. They'll thank me one day though :) It is very worth while, and I don't design any system now without a fundamental underpinning of concurrency. And I probably stuff it up more often than not, but hey, it's all good fun. And I never want to discourage people, I just want people to be aware it isn't the easiest thing in the world, and you should respect them threadsies. And you are right, writing most anything in a really robust way automatically makes it hard! I also have italics envy. - Phil
-
Most people are probably looking for
vbMultiThreadedControland won't be happy until they can drag/drop it onto their application and be done. :laugh:-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
-
See: BackgroundWorker drag'n'drop tour[^]... :doh:
----
Yes, but can you blame them for doing so if that's the only legal way they can hire programmers they want at the rate they can afford?
-- Nish on sketchy hiring practices
well that's a start, but if you drag a
vbMultiThreadedControlonto your existing crufty more or less upgraded to VB6 app it will magically run 4x faster on a quad core with no code changes whatsoever required. Just leave work early, goto the local bar and buy a Bud.-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
-
Most people are probably looking for
vbMultiThreadedControland won't be happy until they can drag/drop it onto their application and be done. :laugh:-- You have to explain to them [VB coders] what you mean by "typed". their first response is likely to be something like, "Of course my code is typed. Do you think i magically project it onto the screen with the power of my mind?" --- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
dan neely wrote:
Most people are probably looking for vbMultiThreadedControl and won't be happy until they can drag/drop it onto their application and be done.
Yes, the phrase 'most people' because it's fact probably 10% of VB users actually come from a development background (i.estudied at college/uni) that's why VB projects end up being a archetictural disasters.
P Think of the environment; please don't print this message unless you really need to.
-
Rohde wrote:
but it's still a waste of my time doing manuel memory management if I don't really need the speed it buys me - it's more useful spending time domain programming/modelling. But hey I guess some of you need the ego boost you get from new/delete/RAII and other idioms.
Ah.... you are a true visionary :rolleyes: The free lunch is OVER script kiddies days are numbered :-D :jig: :jig: :-D
led mike wrote:
Ah.... you are a true visionary The free lunch is OVER script kiddies days are numbered
Gee, I come to this site to read about java and get some c++ programmer telling everyone the sky is falling. I'll tell you why I like c#, It lets me hire programmers who pump out a lot of code so we can test ideas we have quick and fast without the I AM A COMPUTER GOD mentality of c++ programmers. (only about 25% of the stuff I do is on windows) C# programs tend to be much more reliable and less buggy than stuff written on C++ in a much shorter time. All compiler and runtime yes? Kinda eliminates some of the need for tweaking a piece of soft so it runs on everything, if it compiled, it will be pretty stable and get the job done... As for the link to the end of the world processors wont get any faster, hmmm, do you mean to say that for once, there will be time to catch up with the hardware? Obviously when it becomes a real issue,.. Kinda sounds like keyboard envy to me ;-) ah,, what was that about Java? Ohh, yeah kinds look like a 20+ mb download and a complete reinstall with no net :-( i couldn't find anything that broke up the updates for you to download, product continuity, why give yourself a bad name with manual updates I guess.
-
So, is this[^] the only way to obtain a Java runtime installation package, that doesn't require Internet connectivity? :sigh: Why, oh why, is this so difficult? [edit] I found this[^] link (as Rohde also pointed out) but I can't figure out how to get there from the home page unless Java is not actually already installed. I'm trying really hard here not to criticize the general "we hate Microsoft" community, but this is so friggin' typical of these sites. [/edit] Marc -- modified at 11:17 Monday 2nd July, 2007
Marc, This is a guess, but it looks like the link for the entire package. I haven't installed this today, but it does look like the link for the entire package to be downloaded then run as an executable. http://java.sun.com/javase/downloads/index.jsp Hope this helps. As for the flamers: You all say "right tool for the right job" but you don't demonstrate that level of knowledge with your posts. Java - Has a GC, however it runs whenever it wants to. Not just when memory is getting full. This can be disastrous when communicating serially with a device. C++ - No GC. This can be hazardous since mistakes do happen and you might run out of memory. Java was supposed to kill C++. C# was to kill Java. I don't see any bodies anywhere. Each of the languages has its warts and short comings. Not sure why they couldn't get OO right by the time C# was implemented, but then again they were not shooting for write once, run anywhere either. You all need to step back and evaluate the landscape. Choose the language that fits the project. Your managers will gasp but that "should" be how it goes. I'm a C programmer btw, but have programmed in all (meaning wrote meaningful programs) except C#. Back to Java: The installation of the JDK (above) allows you to develop. So its not as easy to attain and setup. But the JRE is mostly seamless as a browser plugin, so anyone who writes it off as "too hard to install" must be talking about the JDK not the JRE. I hope this helps you Marc.
-
I am referring to java.util.concurrent There are a number of common threads (ha! I'm so punny!) with java.util.concurrent and some of the .net framework, but I haven't found all the replacements yet. But this is getting dangerously close to non-lounge talk. Naughty us! - Phil
Phil Martin... wrote:
I am referring to java.util.concurrent
Ah, I think that was added after my Java stint. When I started there were all sorts of things missing like the sort interface. What is it, like IComparable, ISortable or something? I never understand everyone whining about lack of library encapsulation. When there was no sort interface in Java I just wrote my own. It took very little time and after it was added to the SDK it looked very similar to the one I did so porting was minimal. I think for many novice developers, they started after all these large libraries already existed. They never knew the days when you wrote your own libraries so when a library doesn't have some feature they get stuck, like a pig at an empty trough, they starve because they aren't hunters.
-
led mike wrote:
Ah.... you are a true visionary The free lunch is OVER script kiddies days are numbered
Gee, I come to this site to read about java and get some c++ programmer telling everyone the sky is falling. I'll tell you why I like c#, It lets me hire programmers who pump out a lot of code so we can test ideas we have quick and fast without the I AM A COMPUTER GOD mentality of c++ programmers. (only about 25% of the stuff I do is on windows) C# programs tend to be much more reliable and less buggy than stuff written on C++ in a much shorter time. All compiler and runtime yes? Kinda eliminates some of the need for tweaking a piece of soft so it runs on everything, if it compiled, it will be pretty stable and get the job done... As for the link to the end of the world processors wont get any faster, hmmm, do you mean to say that for once, there will be time to catch up with the hardware? Obviously when it becomes a real issue,.. Kinda sounds like keyboard envy to me ;-) ah,, what was that about Java? Ohh, yeah kinds look like a 20+ mb download and a complete reinstall with no net :-( i couldn't find anything that broke up the updates for you to download, product continuity, why give yourself a bad name with manual updates I guess.
-
Rohde wrote:
but in many many situations it's fast enough
True, but the right tool for the right job. Does a Java programmer switch to C++ when performance drops? No, he suggests buying a faster machine. I've heard that from my team too, don't performance program, suggest faster hardware.... :doh:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
The performance issues that most people cite with Java are due to poor understanding of the internal implementations of the data structures they are using. For instance, if you use a LinkedList to store data elements, then traverse the list by retrieving items with List.get(), performance will be on the order of n^2. If, on the other hand, you traverse the list by using an Iterator, and/or you use a different type of data structure (such as an ArrayList), your performance will be linear. In addition, if you use a class that has built-in synchronization support (such as a Vector or Stack), but you do not require synchronization, you are wasting your resources and should instead use a data structure that does not have built-in synchronization support (such as a List, which is easy to use in place of both Vectors and Stacks). The JVM will compile Java bytecode down to native code once a method has been executed many times. Or, if you want your program to run faster from the start, you can launch your JVM with the -server option. A couple of years ago, my company used Java to analyze 16 million+ lines of COBOL source code on parallel machines within just a few hours. Although the CPUs were pegged at 100%, we found that the largest bottleneck was disk I/O, and we compensated for this by pooling objects, compacting our output format, and optimizing the read/write strategies used by our processing routines. The amount of labor required to perform these optimizations was far less than the amount of labor expended on parallel efforts to port parts of the logic to native code, and the Java stuff was easier to debug and maintain. Sure, someone who is married to C could say we aren't as seasoned in C and that we're wimps for not wanting to do our own memory management, and they would be right--at least on the "seasoned" part. ;) But the tradeoff is that we were able to develop the application in less time; and it has been easier to debug and maintain, if only because low-cost Java development tools are easier to use for navigating and refactoring existing code. However, we have both computed and measured the execution time of various computation-intensive tasks that we perform, and the performance is very similar between C and Java implementations. I'm sure the magnitude of the performance discrepancy between Java and native C apps is still somewhat application-dependent, but the truth is that an application won't be slow simply because it's written in Java--and even if that were the case, there are ways o
-
Phil Martin... wrote:
I am referring to java.util.concurrent
Ah, I think that was added after my Java stint. When I started there were all sorts of things missing like the sort interface. What is it, like IComparable, ISortable or something? I never understand everyone whining about lack of library encapsulation. When there was no sort interface in Java I just wrote my own. It took very little time and after it was added to the SDK it looked very similar to the one I did so porting was minimal. I think for many novice developers, they started after all these large libraries already existed. They never knew the days when you wrote your own libraries so when a library doesn't have some feature they get stuck, like a pig at an empty trough, they starve because they aren't hunters.
Yeah, I started at around the same time. It's been really exciting watching it grow over the years. And whining - yes, I feel the same. HAve you talked to any graduates lately about how they would do text searching? or sorting? or any sort of container? I'm not sure what it is like in the rest of the world, but in this part of australia, it isn't so promising. But then again, it does allow many people to solve many problems without having to learn all the inner workings of the magic libraries. So it isn't all bad. I'm really looking forward to writing some of these structures in C#, it'll be fun! But the concurrent library, I recommend you read over the javadoc, it is really cool stuff. It has a been around for a while now (couple of years at least), but some of the highlights for me are: Executors - basically a bunch of smarter thread pools, all based off the one interface. So if you write your threading calls to all start using an executor interface, you can try out different scheduling strategies with a minimum of fuss. Callable, Future and FutureTask - Similar to async delegates that return values, but a fair bit more verbose :( But very very cool though. It made a very big deal to heaps of the stuff I was working on at the time. The simple feature of having it start some work, and block whe you call get() (if you wanted it to) simplifed things soooo much over wait/notify code. Futures also tied into executors very well, as you could use different mechanisms fo shceduling the Future onto different threads. CyclicBarrier - handy way to have all threads stop at a common road gate. CountDownLatch - my favourite. Easy way for one or more threads to block until some other threads do some work. Sure it's lazy, but soooo much simpler than wait/notify. Exchanger - It allows two threads to block at a point and then swap objects. I didn't use this one much but it would be very handy to have in the work I'm doing in c# now. I just have to come up with a way to do it reliably in c#, and I'll be laughing. CopyOnWrite containers - very handy to have in some situations. And very hard to write correctly yourself.
-
stickershock wrote:
Obviously when it becomes a real issue,..
Ummm it already is. Apparently you can't read or you don't understand the subject matter of the article. I'm shocked... no really... I am. :zzz:
led mike wrote:
Ummm it already is. Apparently you can't read or you don't understand the subject matter of the article. I'm shocked... no really... I am.
For whom? yeah, for some big math crunching, let's figure out the trajectory of the next mission to the zathar galaxy. for most of the real world stuff, the difference of 4 times faster is the difference in 250 milliseconds or one second. Let's face it, the guy using C# to write apps is probably fast and dirty than gee, sqeeze the most out of these 6 processors I have. If it's mission critical, shouldn't you be developing under unix? :-)
-
stickershock wrote:
Obviously when it becomes a real issue,..
Ummm it already is. Apparently you can't read or you don't understand the subject matter of the article. I'm shocked... no really... I am. :zzz:
Dude, you got 4000+ posts here, you should be writing a book instead of software :-) You could call it my c++ is bigger than yours :-) I don't care to get into a pissing war with someone who has soooo much freee time.