[NateDad]

For pure processing speed, Go is pretty comparable to Java for code that does not heavily rely on generics.

http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?t...

What Dave's presentation mentions is the memory... note the huge difference in memory footprints of the programs. That's where java loses heavily, and that can affect speed as well, which was his point.

[ssmoot]

> for code that does not heavily rely on generics

Does adding Generics heavy code move the needle in Java's favor?

As a Scala developer your comment just jumped out at me because even doing a lot of Akka this past week, there's hardly a line of code that doesn't instantiate or manipulate a Generic.

Just curious. I'm sure Go will get faster. I'm sure it's better suited to certain problems (memory constrained especially).

[seanmcdirmid]

No. If you don't use generics in Java, you get the same memory footprint of not using generics (or since it doesn't have type parameters, using any) in Go. So the author is making an unfair apples-oranges comparison when the apples-apples comparison is quite obvious: one can write an int-list in Java just as easily as they can in Go.

Frankly, this is just strong intellectual dishonesty.

[stcredzero]

Frankly, this is just strong intellectual dishonesty.

If you're going to harp on rigor, then you need to consider then eliminate the prospect of an honest mistake.

[seanmcdirmid]

Intellectual dishonesty doesn't mean lying, it could just mean "honest mistakes" that fail to apply proper reasoning and comparisons.

[stcredzero]

Right now, you seem to be making an "honest mistake" with my referents. You seem (atypically) weirdly consistent with such honest mistakes in these threads. What is the lie, exactly?