Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF

"Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de>
20 Oct 2001 21:25:53 -0400

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[8 earlier articles]
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF jesper@zuschlag.dk (Jesper Zuschlag) (2001-10-13)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF David.Chase@naturalbridge.com (David Chase) (2001-10-13)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-10-13)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF vbdis@aol.com (2001-10-13)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (2001-10-16)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (2001-10-16)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2001-10-20)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF vbdis@aol.com (2001-10-20)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2001-10-20)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF chase@world.std.com (David Chase) (2001-10-23)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF marcov@toad.stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2001-10-28)
Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF alexc@world.std.com (2001-11-04)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: "Joachim Durchholz" <joachim_d@gmx.de>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 20 Oct 2001 21:25:53 -0400
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 01-08-091 01-09-064 01-09-075 01-10-051 01-10-075
Keywords: UNCOL, Java
Posted-Date: 20 Oct 2001 21:25:53 EDT

Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> Sunil Kumar Anand <asunil@csa.iisc.ernet.in> writes:
>
> >Yes,everything can be ported to JVM.But the important point to be
> >noted is how good rather bad the efficiency of the programs will
> >be.Most of the times it happens that u r spoiling the efficiency of
> >the language which u r porting to JVM.
>
> Actually, that point is not so important now. The issue which is more
> important these days, as machines continue to get faster, is how good
> or bad the efficiency of the *programmers* will be.


Unfortunately, this is not true (yet).


I'm involved in the midst of a Java project, and unsatisfactory
performance is one of the more annoying things. I have been told it's
more a library problem than anything else, so YMMV. OTOH modern
processors are fast enough to tolerate slow library design if written
in C, but not fast enough to tolerate slow library design if written
in Java, so there's still a point: programmers must expend more effort
to gain reasonable efficiency.


Regards,
Joachim

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.