+1

One of the things that I like Android is Java and right now native
code runs few times faster than   Java... JIT is a must for Android.
NDK is ok... but JIT is must.

Strange that Google decided to go with interpreter... mobile phones
have limited resources, lower performances and interpreter is
something that is not recommended on mobile phones...

Also increase VM's 16 MB to 32 MB.

On May 23, 2:19 am, Cedric Vivier <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:33 AM, blindfold <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > whereas Dalvik bytecodes are always only run through an
> > interpreter. In looking for means to accelerate Android programs, I
> > would greatly prefer a platform-independent JIT compiler over any
> > platform-dependent solutions such as the NDK/JNI where different
> > distribution packages must be generated for different target platforms
> > based on ARM, x86, MIPS, whatever: a maintenance, packaging and
> > distribution headache.
>
> +1
> By the way why Android still has no JIT (or Ahead-Of-Time JIT) at this time,
> is it because of a technical issue or just lack of time/resources??
>
> Looks like it is one of the main current drawbacks of the platform right
> now..and potentially lessens battery life (ie. more code have to be executed
> to run the same thing in the end).
>
>
>
> > Typically, math code looks syntactically very similar in Java
> > and Javascript, such that there is little effort involved in re-coding
> > one's time-critical sections in Javascript.
>
> True but it would be even simpler just to get the JIT for Dalvik so we can
> use the same language everywhere.
>
> Cheers,
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Android Discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to