I understand what you mean but also seem to have noticed JavaScript/
Ajax really starting to push the envelope and deliver visuals
ironically enough originally envisioned for the parent language Java.
Case of point: http://www.classycode.co.uk/CoverFlow/

/Casper

On Sep 2, 5:26 am, Michael Neale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> yeah their description of JIT may have made sense once, but any jit
> that goes beyond the initial stage of timing methods would go beyond
> it pretty quickly.
>
> This is also a good example of a straw man argument (if it was an
> argument).
>
> On the subject though, I don't think its JS performance that hurst RIA/
> web apps - its the browsers performance with respect to DOM, not the
> time spent (in most cases) in script.
>
> So I don't think this stuff is much of a big deal for web apps (unless
> actually JS performance was an issue for you). For most of the world.
> its dom manipulation which has nothing to do with this (unless they
> start implementing the browser itself in JS, which is possible).
>
> On Sep 1, 12:53 am, Joshua Marinacci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hotspot is *not* a traditional JIT compiler. While that was true in  
> > the early days of HotSpot (many years ago) today it does lots of  
> > advanced realtime prediction and analysis.  I would say that HotSpot  
> > is the most advanced general purpose VM today, and it's constantly  
> > being improved. Where I see real competition coming is special purpose  
> > VMs; like things that will optimize your code into a pixel shader, or  
> > that do crazy automatic parallelization, or that focus on energy  
> > consumption over everything else.
>
> > I think they just mention Java's VM because it's the one most people  
> > are familiar with. If the CLR was more commonly used they would have  
> > mentioned that instead. :)
>
> > On Aug 31, 2008, at 3:44 AM, sherod wrote:
>
> > > Java gets the (usual) dishonorable mention with Mozilla implying that
> > > their tracing JIT compiler is superior to the JIT solution in Java.
>
> > > Anybody with stronger experience than I with this stuff care to
> > > comment?
>
> > > *Start quote*
>
> > > Traditional just-in-time compilers (like Sun’s Hotspot VM) are in
> > > their design and structure very similar to static compilers (like
> > > GCC). They observe which methods get executed frequently, and
> > > translate the method into native machine code once a certaint
> > > threshold has been reached. While such methods often contain
> > > performance-critical parts (such as loops), they often also contain
> > > slow paths and non-loopy code, which barely if at all contributes to
> > > the runtime of the method. A whole-method compiler, however, has to
> > > always analyze and translate the entire method, even if parts of it
> > > are not particularly “compilation-worthy”.
>
> > > Trace-based compilation takes a very different approach. We monitor
> > > the interpretation of bytecode instruction by the virtual machine and
> > > scan for frequently taken backwards branches, which are an indicator
> > > for loops in the underlying program. Once we identify such a loop
> > > start point, we follow the interpreter as it executes the program and
> > > record the sequence of bytecode instructions that get executed along
> > > the way. Since we start at a loop header, the interpreter will
> > > eventually return to this entry point once it completed an iteration
> > > through the loop. The resulting linear sequence of instructions is
> > > what we call a trace.
>
> > > *end quote*
>
> > > Rest of the article here:
>
> > >http://www.infoq.com/news/2008/08/tracemonkey
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to