gcj's virtual machine is in the libraries. With GCJ you are not as native as if you just programmed in C instead.
On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 19:38, Kevin D. Kissell wrote: > > I dont want to FUD kaffe-folks, but please think a bit about my ideas > > why developing kaffe is a waste of time. > > > > > > Kaffe is not powerful enough to be a java-replacement, in many part gcj > > beats kaffe in both, performance and plenarity. > > Kaffe is a virtual machine. gcj is a native runtime package. > A virtual machine can, at least in theory, offer a higher degree > of security and reliability. A native compiler/runtime package > can, at least in theory, offer a higher level of performance. > Which is better depends on the application. > > It would probably be pretty rational to eventually have > a common code base between the Kaffe and libgcj > for the basic bytecode interpretaters, though. > > > _______________________________________________ > kaffe mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe _______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
