On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 08:24:26PM +0200, Michael Koch wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 07:49:58PM +0200, Daniele Cruciani wrote: > > Il giorno mar, 29-03-2005 alle 18:02 +0200, Michael Koch ha scritto: > > > On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 05:35:55PM +0200, Daniele Cruciani wrote: > > > > would it be done as .... > > > > hope java-gcj-compat will be in Debian asap, at least in experimental. > > > > > > What do you wanna gain with this? I see no real benefit in this over the > > > current situation. eclipse--ecj will be in debian when eclipse gets in. > > > > no, no gain, it is just for testing (testing if there is a gain in using > > precompiled jars). > > > > asap == when eclipse-ecj will be in debian && gcc-4.0 is released ... > > I see no reason to imidiately switch everything to eclipse-ecj and > gcc-4.0 when it hits debian. We live from freedom of choice and > mono cultures are bad.
Absolutely, it is just that, another choice. I have not tried free-java-sdk, but as I can read in description it make a choice in tool, and it is just a package with the same aim of java-gcj-compat. Anyway, it has to be done a choice in building as if there are advances on using a java compiler over using another it _should_ be used that. But, as you noted, there are no benchmark now, on performance. There are a number of other factor for adopt a compiler over another of course, thus I just say it should be used and not must I have some hardware problem now, but what I would do is just benchmark performance of precompiled over non precompiled ecj in order to see if there is a real gain, and ecj is an example of a real application that probably do not need to load jar but is complex enough to see some comparition. I would not setup a java vm war. Daniele. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
