Talk:Java performance: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:31, 25 June 2008

Revision as of 19:11, 4 August 2008

Line 58:

Clearly there is some disagreement about speed. Nothing wrong with that. But the article makes two statements that directly contradict each other: 1) "Hence, when Just-in-time compiled, its performance is lower than the performance of compiled languages as C," and 2) "Java's speed is now comparable with C or C++." Perhaps there is not a sufficient consensus that can be backed up by verifiable references in which case the article should not make claims either way (and should just point out that performance is a controversial issue, citing appropriate references to the controversy). Or perhaps there is. Either way the article should not say both that Java performance is lower and that the performance is comparable. <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/71.84.19.38|71.84.19.38]] ([[User talk:71.84.19.38|talk]]) 22:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Collectoins microbenchmarks ==

There was a comment about these microbenchmarks saying: ''However the test is probably biased against C++ since it creates "dynamic objects" even if C++ can create stack objects while Java can't. Heap allocation is slow in C++ since its a general mechanism that should be used only if really needed.''. I rewrote it a little to make it more neutral (the ''probably'' was not sourced based, so I changed by ''may be''), and I put a ''fact'' tag, because when looking at the article in question, I saw nowhere if the author used heap or stack for initial memory allocation of the Objects. Plus Objects defined by STL are allocated on the stack, even if the memory itself can be allocated on the heap. [[User:Hervegirod|Hervegirod]] ([[User talk:Hervegirod|talk]]) 19:11, 4 August 2008 (UTC)