On Thu, 2007-09-20 at 16:15 -0700, GAVIN Darren * OPS EAS wrote: > No matter how much you try and tune Java, or listen to Java Only folks > explain that it's just as fast. It simply is not, at best it is only > marginally faster then running REXX in interpretive mode.
You overlook the Just-In-Time compilers: http://www.trl.ibm.com/projects/jit/index_e.htm Wikipedia has a short overview of JIT improvements over the years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_performance See also this (four years old!) paper comparing C++ and Java for low level and numeric operations: http://www.idiom.com/~zilla/Computer/javaCbenchmark.html As another poster pointed out, startup times are expensive. Java requires more memory and some operations (JNI, object passing) are slower. But apparently due to hard-to-optimize pointer constructs in C, some C programs are actually slower than Java. YMMV and all that. Like everything else in this business, the answer to whether or not a Java program will perform better than another is "it depends". -- David Andrews A. Duda and Sons, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
