3 ms·

This would be a terrible move and will retard the uptake of Java 9. Why not leave it as it is or just repackage it until replacements snake their way through t

by derriz 11y ago

This would be a terrible move and will retard the uptake of Java 9. Why not leave it as it is or just repackage it until replacements snake their way through the JSR process and then users can migrate their source. Java will never bridge the performance gap with C/C++/etc. until it plays nice with modern architectures where being memory cache friendly is vital for performance. Unsafe has been shown to allow orders of magnitude speed improvements for certain tasks. While I am on the subject could someone explain the point of Jigsaw? It will deliver nothing to current users and why bother with a cutdown Java on small devices these days when the cheapest phone has more power than desktops of 10 years ago? It seems to have consumed enormous resources and caused delays while Java is slipping further behind C# and other modern languages.

bitmapbrother 11y ago
Perhaps they have something in mind to replace unsafe? Project Valhalla seems to address a lot of the reasons why people use unsafe. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/jvmls2014taylorrose-2265209.pdf http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/jvmls2014taylorrose-2... (Page 40) There is also PackedObject from IBM. It's an experimental feature in their J9 JVM and it allows improved serialization and I/O of Java objects by allowing direct access to native/off heap data. https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/ajax/download/c577ef63-62aa-496a-a586-9703a762f306/3e254fbb-82d7-4678-95e5-1f6751e896d8/IBM%20Java%20PackedObjects.pdf https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/ajax/dow... With the introduction of Valhalla, PackedObject and other technologies I think we'll see the performance gap decrease quite a bit.