> > "Interpreted"? Common implementation of JavaScript are interpreted. > Most > > implementation of Java are compiled, as far as I know... > > > Most implementations of Java (e.g. Sun's) compile the source to > bytecode > for a virtual machine, which is subsequently interpreted on the > target > machine.
That's right. And for a second I mixed up the JVM specs with the .NET specs which impose JIT'ing. Sorry about that. > While JIT compilers have improved performance, I do not > completely buy the argument that they are as fast as native > compilers. > With this execution model, startup is always slower. True. Very True. > I would still argue that Java is slower than C for most purposes. I would agree with you there. Thank you for clearing my confusion. -- Stef ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
