[rescue] spam WPOISON
Joshua D. Boyd
jdboyd at celestrion.celestrion.net
Tue Sep 9 11:53:24 CDT 2003
On Tue, Sep 09, 2003 at 11:39:13AM -0500, Jonathan C. Patschke wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2003, Kevin wrote:
> > The vast majority of OO is C/C++. OO will run fine
> > without a JVM. I agree that OO is incredibly slow
> > (1.1beta is better) but that's not due to Java.
> I seriously hope you're joking. There is No Reason that native machine
> code should -ever- run that slowly.
Look, imagine your $doomedProject. There is no reason that the tools
they are using to build the Java code couldn't be generating C++ code.
And if they were generating C++ code, what do you think the chances are
that it wouldn't grind to a halt almost as quickly, based on what you've
said about it?
I don't believe that there is any good reason for Java code to be more
than an order of magnitude slower that C++.
More information about the rescue