> Java code is optimized as it is used. This means that optimizations are
> based on actual usage rather than assumed usage. Some advantage is
> gained from that. Whether it results in better overall performance
> depends on the application and usage.

For JIT compilers there is always a tradeoff in the time it takes to
compile and the quality of the code. It has been proven formally that
static compilers will always be superior if you know what architecture
they run on exactly, which is a big assumption. Although, JIT
compilers provide a HUGE performance increase over interpreters. The
only thing JIT compilers can on average do better than static
compilers in very specific cases is branch prediction. On the other
hand even though garbage collection can be done better by human logic
as well to date, much like good chess programs this is a thing that
the Java garbage collector does better than most programmers.

Having said all that these aren't the reasons Java is a better
language than C or C++ for applications because things like pointer
arithmetic still increase/decrease the speed much more dramatically
than this sort of optimisation. What Java really does better is how it
handles concurrency and IO. In the first case, under the hood this
relates to how vtables are cloned, synchronized and all sorts of other
transformations handled on modern architectures.

This stuff hasn't much to do with VoIP, I just wanted to make the
point that what a program is written in isn't important, its the logic
of the program that makes the difference. For example, in the Python
world, both the Python compilers written in Python (PyPy) and .NET are
more performant than the Python interpreter written in C when the
program scales. But the JIT compiler written in Java is always slower
than all of them, in all cases. This isn't because Python and .NET are
better than C than Java. It's because they were better written
programs.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to