Attila Szegedi wrote:
Are there any drawbacks to compiling with GCC 4.0.1? ('Cause that's
what appears to be coming bundled in Apple developer tools on Mac OS X)
No, building with Apple's 4.0.1 is pretty fine. The problems come with
Apple's 4.2.1. I get crashing binaries with that compiler.
john.r...@sun.com wrote:
Changeset: 08a326d18c57
Author:jrose
Date: 2009-07-07 20:55 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/mlvm/mlvm/hotspot/rev/08a326d18c57
indy.compiler: A couple more CP fixes, to make tests work in -Xcomp mode.
I just tried some simple tests with -Xcomp
Christian Thalinger wrote:
john.r...@sun.com wrote:
Changeset: 08a326d18c57
Author:jrose
Date: 2009-07-07 20:55 -0700
URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/mlvm/mlvm/hotspot/rev/08a326d18c57
indy.compiler: A couple more CP fixes, to make tests work in -Xcomp mode.
I just tried
On Jul 8, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
# Error: assert(mt == t-xmeet(this),meet not commutative)
It's not related to MethodHandles as it happens too early.
I just verified that the bug is in nonperm.patch (or at least it
produces the bug).
It's probably simple to fix, but
Hi all,
I have re-run a Fibonacci benchmark generated by my G7 compiler on the
latest mlvm build (also with indy.compiler and indy.compiler.inline
patches).
And the performance is incredible !!!
[r...@andlinux g7]# time `java -cp
.:target/classes/:target/test-classes -server
Chanwit Kaewkasi wrote:
Hi Christian,
It's very close to *native Java* now, if I correctly remember the figure.
That's good news! Guessing this is a product build, could you time a
run it with -XX:-Inline to see if your methods are inlined (with a debug
build you could do a
