> > One cannot make such blanket statements. JAVA is a language, not a > > workload. Yes it does have characteristics that cause it to have long > path > > lengths. However, it also has characteristics that trash caches, > > particularly if the programmer takes OO programming seriously. > > Very true, although observation indicates that there are a lot of really > lazy programmers writing in Java, or ones that are simply ignorant of the > effects of certain programming practices. There are also a lot of > programmers that use the absolutely horrific crap that comes out of most of > the integrated development environments these days without ever looking at > the impact of the code on the environment.
I would have thought that in the particular case of Java, it's the impact of the JVM on the cache that matters, and that few programmers know enough (or should know enough) to have much impact on cache. I added "should" because, with the advent of the next JVM, that knowledge would become obsolete and positively harmful. I note that new Xeons are about to descend on us: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29395.html Next up the Xeons. A uniprocessor Xeon 3GHz with a whopping 1MB cache will ship in Q3. Powers are getting faster, too: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/28596.html The Power5 chip will be implemented in a 0.13 micron process, just like the Power4+ chip that was just announced in the pSeries 650 midrange server a month ago. Those Power4+ chips are now offered at 1.2GHz and 1.45GHz, and are expected to reach 1.7GHz or maybe even 1.8GHz and http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29387.html Servers based on IBM's forthcoming Power5 chip will be four times faster than current Power4 machines. However, I couldn't find just what "four times faster" means. > > Forced use of 'lint' had it's moments -- at least it complained about the > egregiously stupid stuff. > > >Java just happens to be > > less efficient on all fronts than earlier languages, but then Fortran is > > less efficient than assembler. > > Interesting side note: Fortran is around 50 years old (+/- a few). It's > gotten more intensive study by the compiler optimization wonks than any > other language. Talk about geriatric research! 8-) > > -- db > -- Cheers John Summerfield Microsoft's most solid OS: http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/ Note: mail delivered to me is deemed to be intended for me, for my disposition. ============================== If you don't like being told you're wrong, be right!
