Except for the sharing the other arguments are optimisations that happen in different ways on all vms. It's not like hotspur can't or doesn't do any if those. The other main diff that I can tell from my minor poking is the diff bytecide set. Today it seems I suppose sensible to try and mimic the host CPU, I believe dalvik == arm register count and size which must help removing the need to do the stack thing. Why the diff bytecodes ?
On 27/11/2010, at 3:47 AM, Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 12:52 AM, Fabrizio Giudici > <[email protected]> wrote: > As a mere technical discussion here, it's interesting to learn that probably > Dalvik has no technical justification for its existence, other than some > legal points. > > This is incorrect. > > Dalvik was created first and foremost for technical reasons. Dan explained > some of these in this post, but in a nutshell, the traditional JVM model is > not well suited for embedded development and Dalvik addresses this by > focusing on very selective compilation, aggressive memory optimizations, > power consumption awareness and a strong emphasis on multiprocesses and VM > sharing. > > -- > Cédric > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
