I've been chatting to the IKVM guys. dynamic classes is a one time hit,
so no problem there. The overhead is in the exception hangling, most
other areas are fine; .Net has slower exception handling than Java
anyway, IKVM adds further overhead to this. However we have minimal
exception handling in the core runtime which I feel is management;
jereon has shown some ways to avoid the really large hits. The one
caveat, and this is true even with a native port, .Net 1.0 has an
infexible ClassLoader system compared to Java you cannot reload classes
- you have to dump the entire appdomain - which isn't doable. .Net 2.0
apparently allows you to add/remove methods, so maybe we could work
around that.
Jereom has more work planned on speed, so IKVM will only get better; if
performance is only 5% on averag worse - I don't think that justifies a
native port - which will be a huge undertaking, especially as our
platform grows.
Mark
Chinmay Nagarkar wrote:
We should investigate moving additional code/components to .NET that are
deemed to be performance killers. Unless that's impossible within the
constraints of the technology and available resources, my vote is to
leverage IKVM.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Proctor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2006 1:50 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: .net support
I havea updated the blog with some thoughts on .Net support and IKVM.
http://labs.jboss.com/portal/index.html?ctrl:id=page.default.blog&project=jb
ossrules&from=1&link=http://labs.jboss.com:8080/projects/jbossrules/blog/sta
tus_of_IKVM_and_Drools.html#http%3A%2F%2Flabs.jboss.com%3A8080%2Fprojects%2F
jbossrules%2Fblog%2Fstatus_of_IKVM_and_Drools.html
Mark
