Java compilation [was GCs in the news]

[Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d]

On Tue, 2014-07-22 at 06:35 +0000, Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[…]
> Yes it can, if developers bother to do PGO + AOT instead and 
> learn the compiler flags.
> 
> I used to have a stronger opinion on JIT, but given how many JITs 
> perform and do not actually use the hardware as they, in theory 
> could, JIT tend to only be an advantage for dynamic languages not 
> strong typed ones.
> 
> With JIT, writing the code in a way that makes the JIT compiler 
> happy is a lost battle, as it depends on the exact same JIT 
> implementation being available on the deployment system.

I think you have to make good on this claim since the JVM JIT is
intended for Java which is supposedly a static, strongly typed language.
Moreover, evidence from Groovy is the JVM JIT provides only patchy
benefit. The biggest benefit all round is invokedynamic for both static
and dynamic languages. Java 8 would be nothing without invokedynamic.

But maybe we should take this off this list as it is way off topic.

Clearly we can use JMH for benchmarking. I have a couple of codes I
could use to try things out.

So:

1. How to compile and execute to get full AOT *and* switch off the JIT.
2. How to compile and execute to get no AOT and have JIT on full.

then we can begin to compare.

-- 
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20140722/d896ab5d/attachment.sig>