On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Jim Baker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Remi, you may be right - maybe we just need to continue to generate naive
> bytecode and let the JVM sort it out. Just somewhat better naive bytecode,
> that's all.

It's always good to remember that Java JITs are designed to optimize
"dumb, enterprisey Java", so clever Java/bytecode generation can be
self-defeating.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM 
Languages" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.

Reply via email to