Hi there!
gcj's virtual machine is in the libraries. With GCJ you are not asNo, thats wrong.
native as if you just programmed in C instead.
GCJ compiles java to REAL native applications, but the libraries include also an interpreter, so that the application can also load classes which are not nativly compilied.
But the interpreter des not include a jit and is really very slow.
It would be interresting to know if it would be possible to put kaffe into the libgcj as replacement for the current interpreter.
Mfg Clemens
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 ideasKaffe is a virtual machine. gcj is a native runtime package.
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.
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
_______________________________________________ kaffe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kaffe.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kaffe
