7 ms·
The stack also improves. Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, and the first CLR GC was so poor that my team at Microsoft had to resor
by erik_seaberg 5y ago
The stack also improves. Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, and the first CLR GC was so poor that my team at Microsoft had to resort to arrays of structs for keeping a service’s state. These days they’re great, and it’s hard to do better without putting a lot more effort into something like Rust.
- adrianN 5y agoThe JVM is great, but I think it's not too difficult to do better in a language that doesn't force so much pointer-chasing. Cultural differences probably also play a role. Java systems tend to be engineered such that more pointer chasing happens even in places where the language doesn't force it.
- WalterGR 5y agoDoes the CLR improve on that much, with its stack-allocated structs?
- jcelerier 5y ago> Early versions of the JVM were very noticeably slower than C++, The fastest java software I use feels much slower than the slowest c++ one (talking about UI lag)
- ratww 5y agoThere's a popular saying about hardware vs software performance gains: "What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away". I think we can have another in anoter level: "What the language giveth, complex patterns and libraries taketh away". This works not only on performance levels, but also in terms of complexity.
- throw0101a 5y ago* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth%27s_law