Suitability (of Java)
john at johnquinn.com
Sat Apr 3 10:48:32 PST 2004
On Saturday 03 April 2004 12:15, Bill's LFS Login wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Apr 2004, Don Smith wrote:
> > John Quinn wrote:
> > > Don may be surprised to see these results:
> > > http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=5602
> > The only surprise was that Java 1.4.2 was really slow at trig. Is anyone
> > surprised that compilers written by MS produce the fastest code on an OS
> > written by MS?
> More surprising to me was C performance. As with any tool, skill of use
> may have effects and we don't know where his strengths and weaknesses
> may have come into play.
Yeah, I don't know what's up with that trig thing. It'd be nice if we could
figure out what happened. But he mentioned in the article he didn't do
a lot of tuning or have the expertise to do so. They all had their
weaknesses but if you take out the trig, even I was surprised Java did
so well. I was also pleasantly surprised but Tushar's test. That JIT stuff
really helps. And that was with starting the JVM too. I wonder what GCJ
would do to that.
* @author John Quinn <john at johnquinn dot com> LFS 2454
More information about the hlfs-dev