groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From MG <mg...@arscreat.com>
Subject Re: Building Groovy
Date Tue, 19 Dec 2017 01:21:31 GMT
Hmmm, I don't know if Paul has some comeback, but to me you make a very 
convincing point...
In that case the best way forward to me seems to be to
1) Ask non-@CompileStatic Groovy users who can afford the time to switch 
to the invoke dynamic variety of the Groovy jars and report back on 
performance issues (tests that run much slower, etc)
2) Add a clearly visible message to the Groovy distribution download 
section, Maven/etc URL spots that Groovy 3.0 will be invoke dynamic 
only, and again ask for people to use indy now & give feedback if code 
seems to be unusally slow
3) Start a competition who can come up with the most unexpectedly worst 
performing piece of Groovy indy code... ;-)
(To be quite honest, I am wondering myself how invoke dynamic can be 
slower than the older, homebrewn approach, even if that is highly 
optimized - it seems to me like it should be a bit like a software 
renderer going up against a GPU...)

Cheers,
mg


On 18.12.2017 15:54, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> On 18.12.2017 01:01, MG wrote:
>> Just came across this as an example where using Groovy 2.4.6 
>> invokedynamic seems to have been much slower than the older callsite 
>> caching mechanism: 
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-make-groovy-fast-java-david-e-jones 
>> (https://dzone.com/articles/how-to-make-groovy-as-fast-as-java)
>
> It is a chicken-egg problem. We still need to optimize indy in some 
> areas. But this does not happen if no users care to give detailed 
> reports which we can base optimizations on. They on the other hand 
> simply switch to static compilation or old callsite caching then. So 
> in the end there is no optimization, because optimizations tend to 
> inflate and complicate code.
>
> And for the old callsite caching there is another part... I highly 
> doubt it is still well working with JDK9. Worse, I do not see how this 
> can be made work efficiently under JDK9. The preferred way in JDK9 is 
> invokedynamic after all. And while they (JDK developers) tend to 
> increase the capabilities of invokedynamic, it is the opposite story 
> for reflection (deep reflection, callsite sensitive rights made even 
> worse through modules, ...)
>
> So frankly I do not see much of a future for the old callsite caching
>
> bye Jochen
>


Mime
View raw message