"...424 lines of Java+Spring+Hibernate in 18 lines of bash."
Curious. Were you paid to write the Java? If yes, how much did your employer spend to license that software?
Is it possible that bloat supports livelihoods?
Curious. Were you paid to write the Java? If yes, how much did your employer spend to license that software?
Is it possible that bloat supports livelihoods?
The Java code itself probably took less than a few days to write. Java/Spring/Hibernate have no licensing fees (in most cases) and is an industry-standard stack.
I'm guessing the original author didn't write it in Bash because either (1) they didn't know Bash, (2) they didn't know if/when requirements would expand beyond what Bash can easily do, (3) they wanted platform independence, or (4) their team wrote everything else on the Java/Spring/Hibernate stack.
You can argue the merits of all those reasons, but I don't see bloat being profitable as a factor.
The difference in lines and executable size is likely due to an apples-to-oranges situation. Bash scripts seem really light weight if you're not counting all of their system dependencies and if you're writing a program that Bash excels at (such as moving data around).
"J2EE" does not suggest Oracle in any way?
My understanding is that companies that license proprietary software are heavily involved in writing these open standards. Incorrect?
Please forgive my ignorance re: Java.
I think Moore was writing about drivers written in C.
Is the GP's story about programmers at a hardware company?
Does it matter that most of the comments are about high-level programming, not writing drivers?
Just wondering...
Proprietary vendors have had a large part in writing these open standards, but they're mostly interested in creating a standardized, free commons.
GP's story is not about programmers at a hardware company, and it's probably not directly applicable to colorForth.