> From: "Kazuyuki Shudo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 12:23 AM
>
> David Brownell wrote:
>
> > It'd be interesting to see a current version of GCJ in those
> > comparisons. GCJ 2.95.2 is listed in the shudo.net page,
> > but that's _extremely_ old ... I'd suggest using t
Sorry for my mistake on an URI.
> The newest stable version of GCC is still 2.95.2.
> Please see http://www.assurdo.com/dd.sh/web-server/
> This page says, GCC 2.96 is not a formal GCC release.
The above URI should be:
http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-2.96.html
The original false URI points the web page
David Brownell wrote:
> It'd be interesting to see a current version of GCJ in those
> comparisons. GCJ 2.95.2 is listed in the shudo.net page,
> but that's _extremely_ old ... I'd suggest using the 2.96 that
> is distributed with RedHat 7.0, as the most current "stable"
> version available.
Th
>
Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:46 AM
Subject: Re: Tya vs. shuJIT
> Volker wrote:
>
> > does anyone know which JIT is faster - Tya or shuJIT?
>
> http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/
>
> This page shows results of performance comparisons of
> Java runtimes. Applied benchm
Volker wrote:
> does anyone know which JIT is faster - Tya or shuJIT?
http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/
This page shows results of performance comparisons of
Java runtimes. Applied benchmarks are SPEC JVM98,
SciMark 2.0, Linpack benchmark and Eratosthenes sieve.
Andreas wrote:
> http://www.tu-ch
Hi!
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 Volker wrote:
> Hello,
>
> does anyone know which JIT is faster - Tya or shuJIT?
http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/urz/java/news/00021.html
Ciao,
Andreas
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a s
