On Tue, May 25, 2004 at 05:39:34PM +0200, Troed S?ngberg wrote: > On Tue, 25 May 2004 10:51:20 -0400, Jay Oliveri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >1) Fred takes too much CPU and RAM because it's written in Java. > > I hate this depate. > > It's true that object orienting uses up (a few) more bytes than non-OO > programming, but that's trivial compared to the structuring you (can) get > with OO vs non-OO.
Absolutely, virtual pointers are well worth the cost. > > JIT Java (which we're all running) is also very speedy, there's only a few > rare instances where it's worth the trouble to replace code with something > natively instead. Debatable. But most of the problems with Java come from the fact that it is non-free IMHO. If and when freenet works on GCJ, we benefit from: 1. Reduced CPU usage due to better optimization and no compilation at run time. 2. Reduced memory usage for the same reason. 3. Increased performance for BigInteger operations such as crypto; 5-10x faster using the free GMP library than Sun's proprietary implementation. > > On the other hand, it's quite easy to lose control with object creation, > and to forget how to help the GC do the work most efficiently. That has > nothing to do with Java in itself though. Well, Java does tend to produce a lot of object churn. But even if I was doing a project the size of Freenet in C++ I would find a GC very useful. Explicit deallocation support would *occasionally* be useful. > > /me - professional Software Engineer, well trained in C, C++ and Java > (although mostly J2ME) -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]