[jhall1468]

> I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling

You're just wrong there. There are plenty of languages that do something better than Java, but none of them do everything better than Java.

> I don't use Java much but out of the languages you named none of them are better at much and with the exception of C# all of them have far, far worse tooling

Now we are traversing into "my opinion is fact here".

> Python is a very slow dynamically typed language with a horrible deployment and concurrency story.

Who the hell uses Python for concurrency? It has a global interpreter lock... if your use case obligates concurrency and you pick Python you just don't understand what you are doing.

> C# is a real competitor but for the most part it's still tied to Windows.

Yes, let's dismiss every other language because Python is bad at concurrency and you don't like Go's package manager... Give me a break.

[asdf1234]

> There are plenty of languages that do something better than Java

I agree and I never said otherwise. I specifically addressed three of the languages you named (Python, Go and C#).

> Now we are traversing into "my opinion is fact here".

I'd love to see someone argue that Go or Python have superior tooling to Java and the JVM.

> Yes, let's dismiss every other language

I'm not dismissing every other language, I don't even use Java regularly, I'm dismissing two of the "modern" languages you named.

[jhall1468]

> I agree and I never said otherwise. I specifically addressed three of the languages you named (Python, Go and C#).

By pointing out things that they do decidedly worse than Java, which was exactly the opposite of my point.

> I'd love to see someone argue that Go or Python have superior tooling to Java and the JVM.

I never said they did, because they don't, in general. But Python is absolutely superior in some areas (statistical modeling, machine learning) because the tools it uses are, objectively, better.

> I'm not dismissing every other language, I don't even use Java regularly, I'm dismissing two of the "modern" languages you named.

Right, you're dismissing them for decidedly stupid reasons. Literally no one on the planet is going to think Python is a good option for concurrency. And you're opinion on Go is literally just an opinion, that many (myself included) would absolutely disagree with.

[asdf1234]

> because the tools it uses are, objectively, better.

Bullshit. Python is often used for early exploration but the people doing serious work in ML almost always end up using C++, Java or Scala.

> you're dismissing them for decidedly stupid reasons

So having relatively poor tooling, poor package management, poor performance and bad concurrency support aren't good reasons for dismissing a language? Go and Python aren't even particularly well designed languages. That's far more than you've given for dismissing Java and claiming that alternatives are "vastly better for a typical startup."

[jhall1468]

> Bullshit. Python is often used for early exploration but the people doing serious work in ML almost always end up using C++, Java or Scala.

LOL. What? Did you poll every company doing ML work to arrive at that conclusion? C++, sure. Java and Scala? I've literally NEVER seen actual ML work done in either language at either of the 2 companies (both big 4) I've worked at.

> So having relatively poor tooling,

No. Is Java's tooling generally better? Probably. Does that make all other tooling poor? No.

> poor package management

Stop treating your preference as if it's fact.

> poor performance

Which matters sometimes, but not always. If performance were a metric that made a language live or die, nobody would use anything but C/C++.

> bad concurrency support

Only in Python. But that's moot, you don't need concurrency in every application. Do you realize there are ENORMOUS applications, in-use today, that scales dramatically and they are written in a variety of languages, including Python?

> Go and Python aren't even particularly well designed languages.

Your arguments here indicate you have very little understanding of basic language use-cases, so pardon me if I don't hold your opinion on language design to a very high standard.

> aren't good reasons for dismissing a language

They aren't reasons. They are your opinions and a fundamental misunderstanding of basic use-cases. Frankly, based on what you've said so far, your judgement about languages in general is on-par with what I'd expect for a new grad CS major that only used C++ or Java while in college.

> That's far more than you've given for dismissing Java and claiming that alternatives are "vastly better for a typical startup."

And yet I clearly explained why Java is generally not a good choice for a startup. And it seems, most startups agree since the majority don't use Java.

[asdf1234]

> I've literally NEVER seen actual ML work done in either language at either of the 2 companies (both big 4)

I work at one of the big 4 right now and almost all the serious ML is done in C++ and Java. Python is purely used during exploratory phases and even that is being phased out. Most of the other things I said aren't even controversial so I'm just going to ignore you from now on. Enjoy thinking Python and Go are well designed languages.

[jhall1468]

> Most of the other things I said aren't even controversial

Most of the things you said were a straw man and nothing more. Go and Python are good at what they do. I see them as tools in a vast tool box. You think everything is a nail. Enjoy thinking that's a valid viewpoint.

[interestingemu]

GP is clearly right. What's the point of going "that's just your opinion" on every fact he mentions?

[jhall1468]

Yes... "Go's package manager is bad." That's a fact...