Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Managed-Code Bloat Followup-To: comp.lang.java.programmer Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2011 23:04:54 +1200 Organization: Geek Central Lines: 21 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: 118-92-86-36.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: lust.ihug.co.nz 1307358294 6072 118.92.86.36 (6 Jun 2011 11:04:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@ihug.co.nz NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 11:04:54 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.4.11 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:5011 In message , Arved Sandstrom wrote: > Right at the end the author says: > > "The development team lacks the resources to build equivalent > functionality in native code. > > "The last point is important. Maybe a hotshot team of C/C++ developers > could make a better job, but if you don’t have such a team or the money > to hire it, it is not so relevant." > > In other words, and this has nothing whatsoever to do with corporate > software, unless you're in that 5 percent (probably less) of current > programmers who can write high-quality C++, ... Maybe that’s the point: such skills are less common among corporate types. > Point being, these "managed" languages have made the mass market > possible. And yet most mass-market apps avoid them.