5 ms·
There are some advantages to it, at least if the bytecode is designed for it like WebAssembly is. You get portability and the loss of performance isn’t always t
by circuit10 3y ago
There are some advantages to it, at least if the bytecode is designed for it like WebAssembly is. You get portability and the loss of performance isn’t always that bad (WASM is maybe 70%ish as fast as native though that will depend on the workload and VM implementation), and you can reuse existing code. But the JVM isn’t really designed for it
- JohnFen 3y ago> WASM is maybe 70%ish as fast as native That counts as bad performance in my book.
- circuit10 3y agoIt’s not “amazingly non-performant” though. I assume the comment was thinking of something dynamic being run through an interpreter, which might be 1-10% as performant as native, but if you design the bytecode to be statically compilable and simple you can do a lot better. A 30%ish performance hit really isn’t bad for perfect cross-platform compatibility, determinism, and sandboxing for free, and the gap will close as it matures
- JohnFen 3y agoTrue, it's not amazingly poor. But the performance hit is very discouraging nonetheless.