Perhaps they are only vendor promises, but from yesterday's webcast it
seems that Oracle's strategy about Java is to fully embrace the efforts
for multiple languages on the JVM, among others.
Am I too optimistic? I hope not.
Long live the MLVM and the heroic engineers inside and outside
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 17:59 +0100, Rémi Forax wrote:
Nice, it works well on some my small test suites (MethodHandle and indy).
Thanks for testing.
About perf, dynamic calls are a little less efficient than their static
couterparts,
it seems that neither c1 nor c2 inline a method handle call
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 12:15 +0100, Rémi Forax wrote:
Le 28/01/2010 11:34, Christian Thalinger a écrit :
On Wed, 2010-01-27 at 17:59 +0100, Rémi Forax wrote:
Nice, it works well on some my small test suites (MethodHandle and indy).
Thanks for testing.
About perf,
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 13:45 +0100, Christian Thalinger wrote:
Sorry, I didn't see the attachment with the previous email. I'll look
into it.
OK, I'm a bit puzzled. One obvious thing that does not work is that
increment is a local variable. Inlining only works if the MH is a
static or
If you missed yesterday's big Oracle webcast and what to see how the JVM was
mentioned, here are the proceedings:
http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/044498.html
For our purposes, Thomas Kurian's talk is most relevant. But the whole thing
is pretty interesting. (At least, it was to me, for obvious
Thread local garbage collection is a JRockit bleeding edge feature that
allow separate threads in a Java server to have their own heap. There is
of course also a global heap to which shared objects are relocated to.
One important benefit is that these heaps can be garbage collected
Sounds very nice. Thanks for the explanation.
Patrick
___
mlvm-dev mailing list
mlvm-dev@openjdk.java.net
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
