On 23 July 2013 23:39, Charles Oliver Nutter <head...@headius.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Robert Lougher <rob.loug...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> A quick FYI. JamVM is definitely not dead! I'm still actively >> developing/maintaining it (I'm the sole developer, and have been for over 10 >> years - Pekka Enberg forked JamVM at one point but abandoned it and moved >> onto Jato as I wouldn't relicense JamVM under LGPL - I wanted to keep it >> GPL). > > I'm very glad to hear that Jam is still going! > > At the moment, I believe we're going to use the second half of Kumar's > GSoC project to focus on making JRuby run as well as possible on Jam > and IcedTea, both backed by the IcedTea/OpenJDK class libraries. >
I don't know if it's any use, but JamVM should now support JSR 292 on both OpenJDK 8 and OpenJDK 7 (with the backport from OpenJDK 8 in update 40). However, without HotSpot-style optimisations I fully expect non-JSR 292 enabled JRuby to be faster... Of course, there's no JSR 292 support with GNU Classpath! > I'm especially interested in seeing how the performance is (hoping it > will be acceptable but knowing it won't be super fast) and how small a > memory footprint we can get JRuby on Jam (IcedTea and Oracle Embedded > JRE both use a lot more memory than we'd like...I'm hoping for > something more like Dalvik size). > Yes, I'd be very interested as well. JamVM only has a very simple JIT, so it's fast compared to the template interpreter (2-3x) but nowhere near a proper optimising JIT. > I hope that Kumar can ping you from time to time with Jam questions as > we move further into his work on embedded JRuby. Thanks for the > update! > Yes, no problem. Thanks, Rob. > - Charlie > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
