Hacker News

I taught students in Java and Python and noticed that Python is actually harder. Things you don't even notice, like breathing, make a lot of confusion for newcomers.

The biggest one is types -- students think in terms of meaning, not types, e.g. "this my variable contains first name", but they don't realize it's a string. Or "this is products in checkout cart", but the variable is an integer, so it's products count, not a list of product. Once students get idea of getting an item of a collection and getting a field of that item, while watching every type along the way -- that's a major breakthrough during learning.

The easiest to learn would be a language where you have to define all variable types on top, like Pascal (a language created specifically for learning). But Java is still better than Python, as it doesn't even run wit messed types.

Think of each day as a lesson, and then it makes more sense. E.g. Lesson 49 was useful for understanding Lessons 50 and 65.

It's 100 days of Java, not 100 days of Visual Information Architecture.

Nice work! I appreciate the topic and search filters too.

the source is mostly the content tags in each blog posts. https://mohibulsblog.netlify.app/blog/ each post have some content tags. graph is based on that.

will try it this weekend. Thanks for the suggestion

I'd be a bit skeptical of the result given the benchmark program:

    import java.util.ArrayList;
    import java.util.List;
    
    class Day06 {
        public static void main(String args[]) {
            List<String> fileTypeList = new ArrayList<>();
            for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
                fileTypeList.add("fileType");
            }
    
            long beforeForLoop = System.currentTimeMillis();
            for (int i = 0; i < fileTypeList.size(); i++) {
                fileTypeList.get(i);
            }
            long afterForLoop = System.currentTimeMillis();
            System.out.println("Time took in millis for for " + (afterForLoop - beforeForLoop));
    
            long beforeForeachLoop = System.currentTimeMillis();
            for (String s : fileTypeList) {
            }
    
            long afterForeachLoop = System.currentTimeMillis();
            System.out.println("Time took in millis for foreach " + (afterForeachLoop - beforeForeachLoop));
        }
    }

If you want proper results you probably want to use the Java Microbenchmark Harness [0]. You'd probably want some actual data/work as well so the JIT doesn't overspecialize on the benchmark.

Edit: Halfheartedly tried to adapt the LinkedIn benchmark to JMH. Still not a great benchmark and I'm rusty so I wouldn't be surprised if I messed something up, but it's hopefully better the original:

    package org.sample;

    import org.openjdk.jmh.annotations.*;
    import org.openjdk.jmh.runner.Runner;
    import org.openjdk.jmh.runner.RunnerException;
    import org.openjdk.jmh.runner.options.Options;
    import org.openjdk.jmh.runner.options.OptionsBuilder;

    import java.util.ArrayList;
    import java.util.List;
    import java.util.concurrent.TimeUnit;

    @State(Scope.Thread)
    @BenchmarkMode(Mode.AverageTime)
    @OutputTimeUnit(TimeUnit.NANOSECONDS)
    public class MyBenchmark {

        List<String> fileTypeList = new ArrayList<>() {{
            for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
                this.add("fileType");
            }
        }};

        @Benchmark
        public void baseline() {
        }

        @Benchmark
        public int measureFor() {
            int result = 0;
            for (int i = 0; i < fileTypeList.size(); i++) {
                result += (int)fileTypeList.get(i).charAt(0);
            }
            return result;
        }

        @Benchmark
        public int measureForEach() {
            int result = 0;
            for (String s : fileTypeList) {
                result += (int)s.charAt(0);
            }
            return result;
        }

        public static void main(String[] args) throws RunnerException {
            Options opt = new OptionsBuilder()
                    .include(MyBenchmark.class.getSimpleName())
                    .build();

            new Runner(opt).run();
        }

    }

    # JMH version: 1.37
    # VM version: JDK 21.0.10, OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM, 21.0.10+7-Ubuntu-124.04
    # VM invoker: /usr/lib/jvm/java-21-openjdk-amd64/bin/java
    # VM options: <none>
    # Blackhole mode: compiler (auto-detected, use -Djmh.blackhole.autoDetect=false to disable)
    # Warmup: 5 iterations, 10 s each
    # Measurement: 5 iterations, 10 s each
    # Timeout: 10 min per iteration
    # Threads: 1 thread, will synchronize iterations
    # Benchmark mode: Average time, time/op

    Result "org.sample.MyBenchmark.baseline":
      0.254 ±(99.9%) 0.022 ns/op [Average]
      (min, avg, max) = (0.247, 0.254, 0.262), stdev = 0.006
      CI (99.9%): [0.232, 0.276] (assumes normal distribution)

    Result "org.sample.MyBenchmark.measureFor":
      693178.390 ±(99.9%) 60793.583 ns/op [Average]
      (min, avg, max) = (676266.480, 693178.390, 718114.554), stdev = 15787.901
      CI (99.9%): [632384.806, 753971.973] (assumes normal distribution)

    Result "org.sample.MyBenchmark.measureForEach":
      693756.240 ±(99.9%) 7549.769 ns/op [Average]
      (min, avg, max) = (691685.231, 693756.240, 696573.323), stdev = 1960.651
      CI (99.9%): [686206.470, 701306.009] (assumes normal distribution)

for each is syntactic sugar for a while loop with an iterator. It will always be slower than the classic for index loop over the same collection/array.

would love to know how can i improve if you can give some feedback like which part is confusing.

sorry as UI was not optimized enough for mobile but my intention was to show the adventure of writing and learning more about java

Learning java is not that hard. I really love this language with all its quirks. so i guess i will be little biased here but its my fault not to represent the information in such a way that it can be more intuitive.