3 ms·
It existed, but went away because Java bytecode is semantically a terrible language for a CPU to execute. Jitting it down to something that fits hardware better
by Tuna-Fish 10y ago
It existed, but went away because Java bytecode is semantically a terrible language for a CPU to execute. Jitting it down to something that fits hardware better greatly increases speed, so the best you can do is move that jit into hardware, and even then you are hamstrung by the verbosity of the bytecode.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago> Java bytecode is semantically a terrible language for a CPU to execute As someone who's not a jvm or hw person: why's that?
- Tuna-Fish 10y agoJava bytecode is stack-based and serializes all execution in a thread. In CPU design, you get speed by doing things in parallel, and doing the transformation of Java bytecode stream to some format that allows more instruction-level parallelism takes more time than is available in a CPU frontend.