Revision as of 15:52, 3 October 2013 edit Rishaun14 (talk \| contribs) 6 edits →Performance Tag: gettingstarted edit ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:58, 12 November 2013 edit undo Prosfilaes (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 10,503 edits mark link as dead; it's a problematic cite given that the claim depends on the details of the test Next edit →
Line 35: == Performance == The compilation function in GCJ should have a faster start-up time than the equivalent bytecode launched in a JVM when compiling Java code into machine code.<ref>[http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/misc_slides/gcj2.pdf GCJ: The GNU Static Java Compiler]</ref> GCJ does not execute{{Clarify\|date=August 2013}} faster than bytecode executed by a modern [[Just-in-time compilation\|JIT]]-enabled JVM.<ref>[http://zigabyte.com/blog/GCJ_vs_Java_JIT_Performance_Comparison.doc GCJ vs Java JIT Performance Comparison]{{Dead link\|date=November 2013}}</ref> == CNI (Compiled Native Interface) ==

GNU Compiler for Java: Difference between revisions