Chuck Esterbrook wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 2:21 PM, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> David Brown wrote: >> >>> Technically, I think it's a lot better choice of a runtime than Java. >>> >> It's a better architecture. The JVM's are still a better implementation. >> Even Miguel acknowledges this and says they don't bother with trying to >> beat/match MS's CLR performance, but rather go for after the Java VM's, >> because they are so far ahead. >> > > The last time I investigated, which was probably 2-3 years ago, C# was > benchmarking faster than Java on Windows. It was also requiring less > memory. > > Do you have newer figures? e.g., a URL we can look at? > Not handy. Miguel said that CLR's support for struct's and generic types (and a more sophisticated type system in general) provides it with some performance advantages, but if you stick to using capabilities that both can use, the JDK JVM was more aggressive in its optimizations.
--Chris -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
