[jdev] Re: The State of Our Code-bases
rcb at ceruleanstudios.com
Sun Aug 29 01:01:34 CDT 2004
> Not to drench the end of this with gasoline. Yes, C is prone to memory
> and bugs from misuse. That's why they made C++. :-)
Since when did C++ fix the tendency towards memory leaks? Even
Objective C, which uses a Smalltalkish object model and has garbage
collection, is not particularly immune to memory leaks. ;)
As you say, no programming language will solve all your problems for
you. Interpreted languages like Python may make it easier to write
code which does not leak, but they may not necessarily scale well for a
server of multiple thousands of users. (I admit I've never done
scalability tests on Python code, so maybe it can in this case.)
Similarly, native, compiled code may be able to do more in terms of
integrating with a desktop OS environment (providing spellcheck
services on OS X from system dictionary, providing system tray services
on Windows, etc.) but you lose the easy cleanup and less-headachy
memory management of an interpreted language.
Like you said, there's no silver bullet.
Rather than see us all going over what should be done to produce one
'reference implementation,' (or what language would be best to write it
in,) I would rather see a process and set of tools for testing how well
a given thing adheres to spec. A 'client' which will connect to a
server, try all kinds of things automatically and record the results,
flagging abnormalities, making it easy to 'certify' a server as fully
compliant. A 'server' a client can connect to and do things, to make
it easier to test the compliance for the client and get certification.
Yeah, I know, I tried this once before, to push for various Jabber
certification programs, for servers and clients and components, but I
think really it would benefit us here. As has been pointed out,
real-world implementations often differ slightly from JEPs, and so
sometimes various bits of software don't always agree on how to do the
same thing on XMPP or Jabber.
I really do still think being able to standardize, both on what
features are supported for various levels of certification, and for how
rigidly those implementations adhere to specification, would be of
I'm sure everyone who is on standards-jig has gotten tired of me
tossing two pennies in, but there's my $0.02 on this. ;)
Rachel 'Sparks' Blackman -- sysadmin, developer, mad scientist
"If it is not broken, give me five minutes to redesign it!"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
More information about the JDev