4 ms·
This is a good comment. Ideally, JIT would reach some asymptotic improvement and then stop running. It would only need to start running again if the code change
by javajosh 10y ago
This is a good comment. Ideally, JIT would reach some asymptotic improvement and then stop running. It would only need to start running again if the code changes.
I think however there is some fundamental communication issues talking about "compilers vs language". Optimizing compilers, by definition, rewrite your code into a "better" form. Even if you are writing C/C++ you probably don't really know what's happening at the register level. Heck, with todays CPUs I wonder if even assembly people know what's actually happening in the registers!
- ethbro 10y agoAnd in x86 at least, even the assembly gets sliced and diced behind the scenes. There have been comments to the same effect on HN before, but I look at language design as an API between humans and computers. Computers need as strict rules on how to execute a thing as possible: humans need something comprehensible. The ideal language finds ways you can increase the former without decreasing the latter (in ways they notice).