On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 14:01 -0500, Dan Lydick wrote:
Naw, but have you ever looked into how to design and
construct a JVM? The fundamental classes like java.lang
can typically have implementation-specific requirements,
so I am trying to focus on isolating these items from
the rest of the
El jue, 02-06-2005 a las 02:11 +0200, Leo Simons escribi:
On 01-06-2005 18:27, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought about it.
Me too.
I'm not sure we'd have a project for someone,
but if we do, it's a good thing for us to do.
I'm not sure, but I don't really think
El jue, 02-06-2005 a las 02:11 +0200, Leo Simons escribi:
On 01-06-2005 18:27, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought about it.
Me too.
I'm not sure we'd have a project for someone,
but if we do, it's a good thing for us to do.
I'm not sure, but I don't really think
El sb, 04-06-2005 a las 17:59 +0200, Sven de Marothy escribi:
(...)
So why create flexibility when there aren't
options?
to enable the development of other options?
without arriving to flexibility syndrome, good interfaces enable
competing implementations.
Your question has exactly the same
On 6/4/05, Michael Hind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Instead, modern JVMs try to balance these compilation burps by using a
strategy (selective optimization) that tries to ensure a method really is
important enough to invoke the JIT on. This is often done by counting the
number of times a method
Steven Gong wrote:
Is the sampling process done before running or during runtime?
The sampling is done at runtime.
(There is not much advantage in using anything other than full
optimization for anything that is compiled ahead of time. However, even
ahead of time compiled methods, such as
Steven Gong wrote:
Is the sampling process done before running or during runtime?
Sampling, like counter incrementing, is done at runtime. They are both
runtime profiling techniques to try to ascertain what methods are
important. The profile (whether method counts or samples) is used
