Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: "raddog58c" <raddog@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Feb 2007 16:09:31 -0800
Or it could cover the gap 200%.
You are basically proving that Java is not efficient by assuming so.
Meaning you proved nothing.
Arne
I wasn't trying to prove anything. Common sense says if you have to
convert from one format to another before you begin executing, you
have an extra step and obviously all things being equal you are not as
efficient, period, end of sentence.
Converted code that's more efficient you could make up for the
conversion - it would depend on the problem space, run duration, and
how well/badly each program were written. The converted code would
need to be more efficient to have a chance to make up for the extra
step. If it were equal to or less efficient, you will not make up the
gap.
That's not a proof -- it's an observation of reality, right?
Well written code in a language like C optimally compiled for the
native environment is going to be tough to beat unless you write in
native assembler langauge. I have actually had to write in native
assembler on more than one occasion in real-time systems where
nanoseconds mattered. That's atypical, but these situations do
exist. Anyone suggesting an interpreted language is the way to go in
these environments either has no understanding of the problem space,
or they've got a lot of explaining to do to make that assertion stick.
At any rate, the bottom line is you can't execute 100 instructions
faster than 50 instructions if they're running on average the same
number of clock cycles -- until someone invents a CPU with an ALU that
executes intermediate code directly, cycles have to be used by the
interpreter to transform to the native binary.
I used to program in Lisp years ago it had similiar issues. Don't hold
me to it, but if I remember right there was a movement by Lisp
aficionados to create a CPU that did exactly that: executed Lisp
directly. These machines obviously never gained a lot of popularity.
There's a beauty in interpreted languages, but instruction-level
efficiency is a trade off you make for the functionality and late-
binding paradigm that interpretation provides. I give the JVM
architects a lot of credit, as under the right circumstances they
glean a lot of efficiency out of Java byte code -- but on balance the
Java code I've worked with in batch, GUI, and web server applications
has not been impressive from a speed standpoint. Functionality wise
it's great, however, so that's the emphasis upon which one should
focus with respect to interp. languages, IMHO.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Arne Vajhøj
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Chris Uppal
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Lew
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- References:
- Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: amalikarunanayake
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Jack Kielsmeier
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: raddog58c
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Mark Thornton
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: raddog58c
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Chris Uppal
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: raddog58c
- Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- From: Arne Vajhøj
- Help me!! Why java is so popular
- Prev by Date: Re: Looking for ant...
- Next by Date: Re: Scatter/Gather in Java or Javascript & html (Dynamic class loading?)
- Previous by thread: Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- Next by thread: Re: Help me!! Why java is so popular
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|