Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (hermes.apache.org: local policy)
Subject: Re: Java Security for Harmony
From: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <b6d95c1a696226c3555d328c672ea5f7@earthlink.net>
References: <5f21a0a9577705abd531cebc48d11085@earthlink.net>
	 <42807005.4070500@algroup.co.uk>
	 <01f801c55541$f26d9430$8400000a@MEANMACHINE>
	 <4280D63C.2060801@algroup.co.uk>
	 <b6d95c1a696226c3555d328c672ea5f7@earthlink.net>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-6gYGLOVxsWwcaDdv/C0s"
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 16:06:14 +0200
Message-Id: <1115820374.1764.46.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0

--=-6gYGLOVxsWwcaDdv/C0s
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi,

On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 21:40 -0400, Bob wrote:
> Some attention DOES need to be paid to speed.  If Harmony is =20
> consistently 3-5X slower than Sun (which it will be, if there's no JIT =20
> and no bytecode verifier and no ahead-of-time compiler), then many Java =20
> apps will simply be too slow to run on Harmony.

Although simple interpreters aren't as speedy as some of the other
execution models out there, the speed of some implementations (notably
gcj) is comparable to other implementations.
See for example:
http://www.shudo.net/jit/perf/
http://www.spindazzle.org/benchmarks/

Cheers,

Mark

--=-6gYGLOVxsWwcaDdv/C0s
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCghFWxVhZCJWr9QwRAnO0AKCFdZN+MLNyX+MeMp4S2lY+G5faYgCfW7dx
7oE7ATBmqQVk8AjzVmiI7ic=
=zbTI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-6gYGLOVxsWwcaDdv/C0s--