[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 mailing list