4 ms·
This is totally awesome. And I'm always blown away at how performant Java is. For some reason people give it a bad rap, but it's still awesome. Though, one thi
by bluejekyll 10y ago
This is totally awesome. And I'm always blown away at how performant Java is. For some reason people give it a bad rap, but it's still awesome.
Though, one thing I wish was included is memory utilization. I would expect Rust and C++ to be significantly better than Java in this realm. (Due to the overhead of the JVM)
- steveklabnik 10y ago> For some reason people give it a bad rap, A lot of people have outdated opinions about Java, I know I did for a long time. Initially, the performance wansnt there, so people held that opinion without updating it when Java updated. Things are very different today.
- stevoski 10y ago> Things are very different today. Java has been fast for at least ten years. Except start-up time. Java still has way too long a startup time, which you notice in desktop apps implemented in Java.
- jeff_petersen 10y agoEven the JVM startup time isn't that bad now. It's actually a lot worse in my experience when using alternate JVM languages like Clojure and Scala.
- bluejekyll 10y agoStartup time can often be dramatically reduced if you unpack the jars. Jars are zip files. Loading a lot of jars can cause significant slow down.
- zigzigzag 10y agoHelloWorld.java runs in about 50msec on my machine. However, there are lots of crap desktop apps written in Java that don't care about startup time. You can write apps with bad startup time in any language: look at OpenOffice (C++).
- FT_intern 10y agoAre there any studies that benchmark the difference between modern C++ and modern Java?
- merb 10y agoActually one's Valhalla will it (expect it late 2022) the memory utilization will change heavily and the memory model, too.