Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Robert Klemme Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Alternatives languages on the JVM: which one or is there no alternative? Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 17:39:10 +0100 Lines: 44 Message-ID: References: <5294b061$0$15961$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> <52955f0f$0$296$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <5295a669$0$15879$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <19zo5i01fjd4t.101filzjnniw.dlg@40tude.net> <52972d87$0$15919$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <5297cbd9$0$15882$e4fe514c@news2.news.xs4all.nl> <16c2e66f-de41-4a63-8525-b6703837ae15@googlegroups.com> <52987501$0$15919$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <01086072-1547-49d0-8ef6-ab6a22deb401@googlegroups.com> <529c9e1c$0$15920$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <529ca6a9$0$15992$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <644dd621-a729-48f1-9e28-61d5bcd5c2a7@googlegroups.com> <529d9961$0$15960$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl> <03a09ab3-7ae1-4b77-a2b8-def9ff166c8e@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net x/4uaT0dXbSGtcGbXDTxoAOK7B22LOFQ9Dh6kSVp2++0NoWLM= Cancel-Lock: sha1:3aNVl2UPdadUuFzsQUWl0ZxmSGQ= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:26894 On 14.12.2013 08:31, Arved Sandstrom wrote: > Truth be told, I never heard of software "architects" back in the '70's > or '80's, it only started showing up as a term in the '90's. Even in the > '90's I don't recall people describing themselves as architects so much > as there were folks who started talking about software architecture. ACK. > All of a sudden with the original dot com boom we started seeing > "architects". That's less than 15 years ago. It's been astonishing to me > how you can actually become an architect with just 5 or 10 years under > your belt, but apparently that's readily achievable. Given the fact that > we've got dozens of conferences and dozens of websites where hundreds of > youngsters with 2-5 years software experience can posture as architects, > either I'm dated or my standards are too high. Yes, indeed. Another thing I find quite irritating is the verve with which people advertise the next new language / framework / project management technique etc. on these conferences. There's a lot of good ideas around but nobody will master any of these if they jump on the next bandwagon at the frequency that they come round the corner. > Martin, I gave up on UML several years ago. That and all other graphical > modeling languages. All of that graphical stuff seriously wastes time - > competent developers understand text better, and God forbid if managers > see UML. Plain English, pseudocode, and sketches on paper work a lot > better. UML works great on paper. I do agree with you when it comes to graphical modeling. That is a waste of time IMHO. But even for paper and whiteboard it's good to have a common graphical syntax - even if you just use a small portion of UML for that. > There actually is a role for architects. It's just that 95 percent of > the people who advertise themselves as such couldn't code their way out > of a piss-soaked paper bag, let alone comprehend a system. I can't comment on the 95% but I have certainly seen this phenomenon. Kind regards robert