Thanks very much for the jrose link. It gives me a much better sense of what the *specific* limitations are. Of those he mentions, the lack of a "vreturn" opcode for returning multiple values seems the most difficult to hack around without using intermediate boxing of structs.
On Dec 7, 1:35 pm, Patrick Wright <[email protected]> wrote: > John Rose blogged about some possibilities for supporting this in the > JVMhttp://blogs.sun.com/jrose/entry/tuples_in_the_vm > > I don't know of anyone working on this, even in prototype form, though. > > There was an interesting side comment from Cliff Click (formerly of > the Hotspot server team, now at Azul), in a blog about performance on > the > JVMhttp://blogs.azulsystems.com/cliff/2009/09/java-vs-c-performance-agai... > > "For arrays-of-small-structs (e.g. arrays of Complex), you are > correct: Java's lousy there (and I added that to C's strengths). When > doing performance sensitive arrays-of-small-structs I turn the > implementation 90-degrees and implement a small-struct-of-arrays. > It's clearly a work-around over a clunky language issue... but the > performance is solidly there (both in memory footprint and in access > speed)." > > Patrick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" 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/jvm-languages?hl=en.
