[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Java status?



Andrew Overholt wrote:
> * Mat Booth <fedora matbooth co uk> [2008-07-04 10:48]:
>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 2:03 PM, Andrew Haley  wrote:
>>> Peter Lemenkov wrote:
>>>> 2008/7/4 Andrew Haley :
>>>>
>>>> [skipped]
>>>>
>>>>>> I'm interested because some packages still built with GCJ, and I'm
>>>>>> curious why they still not rebuild with (for example) OpenJDK?
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> They already build perfectly well with gcj, so I can't see anything
>>> to be gained by changing them.
>> I should think they will continue to be built with GCJ until OpenJDK
>> supports ahead-of-time compiling.
> 
> No, the AOT compilation was a GCJ-specific thing.  In the JIT (HotSpot
> in the OpenJDK case) world, the need for AOT compilation goes away.

Well, kinda-sorta.  Modern JITs undoubtedly do a terrific job, but
there are some environments for which they are a little too
heavyweight.  I still think there's some benefit to be had from
gcj, but probably not on high-powered desktop boxes.

Andrew.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]