From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Cannot ant (like normal decent pmake/bsdmake) figure out from the
dependencies what can be done in parallel. I am not asking for the
awsomeness of 'make -j 8 world' of *BSD - butsomething close should be
possible I take it - could be a nice
On 3/22/02 2:59 AM, Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21 Mar 2002, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box,
Ant isn't doing too many things that could take advantage of multiple
processors - it doesn't
Jason van Zyl wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box, (I compiled some code on a quad processor machine and ant didn't
really seem to move that much faster then on my laptop) but if I compile
ant using gjc would it take advantage of a multi-processor
On Fri, 2002-03-22 at 02:59, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
On 21 Mar 2002, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box,
Ant isn't doing too many things that could take advantage of multiple
processors - it doesn't compile
Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 15:48, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
on 3/21/02 8:41 AM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box, (I compiled some code on a quad processor machine and ant
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On 3/22/02 2:59 AM, Stefan Bodewig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 21 Mar 2002, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box,
Ant isn't doing too many things that could
On Thu, 2002-03-21 at 15:48, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
on 3/21/02 8:41 AM, Jason van Zyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box, (I compiled some code on a quad processor machine and ant didn't
really seem to move that much faster
On 21 Mar 2002, Jason van Zyl wrote:
( the startup time is just amazing, you'll not realize you
run 'ant' instead of 'ls' )
I assume that ant is not made to take advantage of a multi-processor
box, (I compiled some code on a quad processor machine and ant didn't
really seem to move that
Daniel Rall wrote:
Also, would you point me to a
reference on how memory management is handled?
It uses the Boehm collector. For full details see here:
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/
It is a conservative collector that can also implement garbage
collection for C and C++,
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
One other question:
Is there a valuable performance enhancement to compiling to native code with
gcj?
Right now - no, I couldn't notice any significant difference while running
tomcat. It is as fast as IBM JIT ( and faster than hotspot ).
Daniel Rall wrote:
Does the bytecode interpreter [from gcj] handle class loading yet?
Yes. You can invoke the bytecode interpreter directly with gij if you
don't want to compile. Gij will handle Class.forName and friends
correctly.
If you compile to native code, the resulting executable
on 3/19/02 8:36 AM, Daniel Rall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pete Chown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel Rall wrote:
Does the bytecode interpreter [from gcj] handle class loading yet?
Yes. You can invoke the bytecode interpreter directly with gij if you
don't want to compile. Gij will
Pete Chown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Daniel Rall wrote:
Does the bytecode interpreter [from gcj] handle class loading yet?
Yes. You can invoke the bytecode interpreter directly with gij if you
don't want to compile. Gij will handle Class.forName and friends
correctly.
If you compile
On 19 Mar 2002, Pete Chown wrote:
Daniel Rall wrote:
Does the bytecode interpreter [from gcj] handle class loading yet?
Yes. You can invoke the bytecode interpreter directly with gij if you
don't want to compile. Gij will handle Class.forName and friends
correctly.
I actually tested
Pete Chown [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The other thing I would like to push is gcj. It doesn't seem to be very
well known. For people who haven't come across it, it is part of gcc
and it is an ahead-of-time compiler for Java. It also includes a
bytecode interpreter so it can deal with
: Andrus Adamchik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Verzonden: maandag 25 februari 2002 1:27
Aan: Jakarta General List
Onderwerp: Re: The Complete Server Platform?
Tim Hyde wrote:
Andrus,
I'm 100% behind the idea of the complete platform, but I'm worried that
your
proposal talks about 'Web Applications
One small extra: if a RedHat style toolkit distribution were
available,
the
number of independent consultants who could offer their
support services
would exceed the number available to BEA, for example,
eliminating that
argument that 'I buy where I can depend on getting support'.
Well,
Leo,
Jahia
-
goal:provide portal solution built on J2EE components.
notes: Paul, seems like a shrink-wrap commercial
solution to me???
It is. I was just pointing to it as some of the described
plans/proposal were sounded like what it had done.
Enhydra
---
license:
the best. Or is
that getting too altruistic ?-)
- Tim
- Original Message -
From: Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 February 2002 11:00
Subject: RE: The Complete Server Platform?
'kay. Summary:
(everyone, please correct and add
altruistic ?-)
- Tim
- Original Message -
From: Leo Simons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 25 February 2002 11:00
Subject: RE: The Complete Server Platform?
'kay. Summary:
(everyone, please correct and add to?)
---
SIMILAR EFFORTS
Ainsi parlait GOMEZ Henri :
One small extra: if a RedHat style toolkit distribution were
available,
the
number of independent consultants who could offer their
support services
would exceed the number available to BEA, for example,
eliminating that
argument that 'I buy
acoliver wrote:
I think this would be less contentious then you think. Basically if you add
the *oh the power of those who do* principal then you'll probably get some
list chatter but just say are you volunteering and they'll nearly
immediately shutup.
+1
If you get two volunteers in
Leo Simons wrote:
2) a statement of intent in important places on the website.
I'm guessing that putting we would like to see tomcat
integrate with avalon on the projects' respective websites
would mean that such will happen sooner.
My concern would be that this promotes a We are Borg
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 10:30, Ted Husted wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
2) a statement of intent in important places on the website.
I'm guessing that putting we would like to see tomcat
integrate with avalon on the projects' respective websites
would mean that such will happen sooner.
My
On 23 Feb 2002, Pete Chown wrote:
The other thing I would like to push is gcj. It doesn't seem to be very
well known. For people who haven't come across it, it is part of gcc
and it is an ahead-of-time compiler for Java. It also includes a
bytecode interpreter so it can deal with
Ted Husted wrote:
My concern would be that this promotes a We are Borg attitude.
This is exactly why I think setting up a separate project would be a
good idea. A project that would realize the concept of a platform that
uses open tools (as opposed to jakarta-only tools). Though of course
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 12:42, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Ted Husted wrote:
My concern would be that this promotes a We are Borg attitude.
This is exactly why I think setting up a separate project would be a
good idea. A project that would realize the concept of a platform that
uses
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 12:42, Andrus Adamchik wrote
This is exactly why I think setting up a separate project would be a
good idea. A project that would realize the concept of a platform that
uses open tools (as opposed to jakarta-only tools). Though of course it
will
Open Enterprise Distribution ... I'm bigger into descriptive names that
mean something when they don't cause lawsuits...
:-)
You asked... What's in a name?
-Andy
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 13:52, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 12:42, Andrus Adamchik
: Re: The Complete Server Platform?
Open Enterprise Distribution ... I'm bigger into descriptive names that
mean something when they don't cause lawsuits...
:-)
You asked... What's in a name?
-Andy
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 13:52, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
On Sun
Server Platform?
Open Enterprise Distribution ... I'm bigger into descriptive
names that
mean something when they don't cause lawsuits...
:-)
You asked... What's in a name?
-Andy
On Sun, 2002-02-24 at 13:52, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
On Sun, 2002-02
, February 24, 2002 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: The Complete Server Platform?
Open Enterprise Distribution ... I'm bigger into descriptive names that
mean something when they don't cause lawsuits...
:-)
You asked... What's in a name?
-Andy
Bill, Andrew, Andrus, Marc,
How about a (semi?)-catchy name and a meaningful name--
Open Distribution for the Enterprise -- ODE
Recap: This is a webapp project you are talking of? Or something that
serves multiple server components (from Apache and others).
The below was a project I very
eventually !!
- Tim
- Original Message -
From: Andrus Adamchik [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 24 February 2002 21:38
Subject: Re: The Complete Server Platform?
Meaningful names are OK with me too :-) . Suggested versions revolve
around Enterprise
Tim Hyde wrote:
Andrus,
I'm 100% behind the idea of the complete platform, but I'm worried that your
proposal talks about 'Web Applications'.
I believe that what's needed is an alternative to the very idea that J2EE
(or even J2SE) is *the* definitive collection of java libraries, and
There has been a lot of talk about what is wrong with the
current main enterprise server platforms, whether it's
about J2EE, .Net or Oracle.
Many of the Jakarta projects provide a (IMHO) superior
alternative to parts of those platforms. Yet Jakarta as a
whole does not provide an alternative to
I was thinking about another way of pushing Jakarta, partly in the
context of the issue with Sun. If there was an open process for
standard setting, it could make Sun's closed process less important.
The IETF does well at being open, but I don't think they would get
involved in something like
On Sat, 2002-02-23 at 11:01, Andrus Adamchik wrote:
It is interesting that I made a similar proposal (or rather described
the same idea) just yesterday on an unrelated mailing list, with the
normal excuse of being too busy right now to start working in this
direction (
38 matches
Mail list logo
