----- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on
hells-dell.boundaryrider.com.au
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,NO_REAL_NAME
autolearn=no version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Envelope-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivery-date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:51:06 +1100
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] deployable and open source ABMs
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:51:41 -0500
Precedence: bulk
X-BeenThere: [email protected]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9.cp1
List-Id: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
<friam_redfish.com.redfish.com>
X-List-Administrivia: yes
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any
abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - madrid.hostgo.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - hpcoders.com.au
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - redfish.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Your email addresss was not recognized as a subscriber to the FRIAM
list. It's possible you are subscribed under a different address. If
you would like to send emails to the list from this email address,
please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a list of emails
that you would like to be permitted. Sorry for the hassle but we're
trying to prevent spam emails from getting on the list. Thanks.
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 09:50:49 +1100
From: Russell Standish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] deployable and open source ABMs
Mail-Followup-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
<[email protected]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 12:53:18PM -0700, Douglas Roberts wrote:
> 3. Java's performance, because of it's garbage collection design, will
> always be inferior to that of C, Fortran, or C++, which, as you point out,
> are the languages of choice for HPC implementations.
I heard this one said before, but don't really understand it. Sure
unpredictability of garbage collection is problematic for interactive
applications, but for batch processing runs this is not a factor.
Isn't GC no more or less expensive than C++'s delete operator? Or is
the issue that in C++ one can supply one's own allocators for objects,
optimising it for certain cases (eg all objects being the same size
for instance).
Cheers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----- End forwarded message -----
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Mathematics
UNSW SYDNEY 2052 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Australia http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
