2 ms·
The thing I find disappointing is the lack of bytecode changes. The language changes are all just trivial tweaks to javac. Appreciated niceties, sure, but noth
by kllrnohj 7y ago
The thing I find disappointing is the lack of bytecode changes.
The language changes are all just trivial tweaks to javac. Appreciated niceties, sure, but nothing meaty. The VM changes are then likewise focused mostly on the GC. Again, appreciated, but it's entirely disconnected from the language.
Where's the long-overdue improvements to the bytecode? Where's value types? Where's runtime generics?
- pron 7y agoIt's not true that the VM changes focus mostly on the GCs. There have been significant changes to startup time and low-overhead profiling. And there are constant improvements in the JIT compilers. Project Loom's lightweight concurrency also involves big VM changes, but without any bytecode changes. Reified runtime generics for reference types is a bad idea; it destroys language interop for very little gain. Value types and specialized generics for value types, on the other hand, are in the works. You can download and play with them here: http://jdk.java.net/valhalla/ http://jdk.java.net/valhalla/