On Thu, Aug 03, 2000 at 10:25:27PM -0500, Brandon wrote:
> 
> > > My main point is that I'm really getting quite tired of Travis insisting
> > > that the Java node is some sort of toy thats badly flawed, highly
> > > underpowered, and just around as a 'reference implementation.
> > 
> > Will this just turn into a C vs Java flamewar?  All of the stuff that
> > I said in that list of scalability issues that should be handled are
> > stuff that can be handled by a C or a Java Freenet node
> > implementation.  Anyways, I just like C better than Java.  So what?!
> 
> He's not saying you're saying that Java sucks. He's saying that you're
> saying that our implementation of Freenet (which is in Java) sucks. I
> would say, rather, that you're going for high optimization whereas we
> generally feel that the distributed nature of the network will make tons
> of optimization of individual nodes a waste of time. But then there's
> nothing wrong with optimizing your heart out if you feel like it. Just
> give up some props for Scott and Oskar for their excellent work on the
> Java node is all I'm saying.

I don't think that the Java reference node is badly coded.  It just is
that nfreenetd and the reference node have different design goals.
nfreenetd is meant to be high performance Unix style daemon while the
Java reference node is meant for portability.  Of course nfreenetd has
disadvantages.  It isn't nearly as portable as the Java node due to
its heavy use of shared memory, Unix system calls, and the syslog
interface.

In addition to just the coding on the Java Freenet node, there is
other cool stuff that Scott and Oskar are doing such as protocol
design and modeling.  ;)

-- 
Travis Bemann
Sendmail is still screwed up on my box.
My email address is really bemann at execpc.com.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1690 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000803/58661e83/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to