3 ms·
Unfortunately JVM is better than CLR in terms of feature set and performance.
by edwinnathaniel 12y ago
Unfortunately JVM is better than CLR in terms of feature set and performance.
- taspeotis 12y agoMicrosoft is making inroads performance wise (and have been for a while). RyuJIT seems to deliver a nice, practical boost to performance. .NET Native lets you sidestep (with several caveats) the JIT and start executing your code much more quickly. And every other major release they seem to tune the GC to be harder/better/faster/stronger etc.
- pjmlp 12y agoOnly when you forget about: - tail call optimization - AOT compilation as part of the standard toolchain. No need to rely on third party vendors - value types - reifeid generics - painless FFI with external code EDIT: - Forgot about direct control over SIMD instructions. All of those issues are being discussed for Java 9+ and have corresponding projects at OpenJDK.
- CmonDev 12y agoAlso two very well supported versions of VM with distinct advantages: 1) Mono - deploy to every major mobile platform using a well-defined single-vendor pipeline. 2) .NET - unmatched performance on Windows.
- edwinnathaniel 12y agoThere are different JVM implementations too y'know :) http://www.azulsystems.com/ http://www.azulsystems.com/
- pkinsky 12y agoScala has value types & (limited to same-method recursion) tail call optimization.
- pjmlp 12y agoScala value types and tail call optimization are just workarounds. Since they aren't visible at the JIT level, there isn't any guarantee that optimized assembly code will be generated. Additionally, it is very dependent on which JVM it gets to be executed.
- edwinnathaniel 12y agoTo do this (http://stackoverflow.com/a/1072522 http://stackoverflow.com/a/1072522) is still painful in .NET compare to Java.
- CmonDev 12y agoJVM runs faster on some minor consumer platforms such as Linux, but that is pretty much it.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]