Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [4 earlier articles] |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction esmond.pitt@bigpond.com (EJP) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction DrDiettrich1@aol.com (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction torbenm@app-0.diku.dk (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction bmoses-nospam@cits1.stanford.edu (Brooks Moses) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2006-11-01) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction free4trample@yahoo.com (fermineutron) (2006-11-04) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2006-11-05) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction gduzan@acm.org (Gary Duzan) (2006-11-05) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2006-11-08) |
| Re: Languages of multiple abstaction gene.ressler@gmail.com (Gene) (2006-11-08) |
| From: | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 5 Nov 2006 23:35:08 -0500 |
| Organization: | Compilers Central |
| References: | 06-10-12606-11-006 06-11-014 |
| Keywords: | Java, performance |
| Posted-Date: | 05 Nov 2006 23:35:08 EST |
fermineutron wrote:
(snip)
> Also, most pepole would admit that Java is slower than C, so since its
> slower than C, yet there is no fundamental restriction of speed based
> on the level of abstaraction, how come it has not beeen re-optimized
> to match C? Sun definitely got the resources for it.
Java is actually pretty fast.
One of the slowest things to do in any language is memory allocation
and deallocation. Object oriented programming tends to do more
allocate/deallocate than non-OO, though it is more a programming style
than a language.
If you avoid excessive object creation/destruction in the inner
loop Java is likely fast enough.
-- glen
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.