[coyotos-dev] Accept GCJ into the tool chain?

[Haplo]

milliseconds is not a viable measure for this sort of thing. A faster  
processor would produce smaller numbers, and it can vary depending on  
what the processor supports and how the code is written. Trashy code  
can still run fast if it uses SIMD effectively. Also, a factor of two  
is still a rather large amount, even if it is only 1ms vs 2ms. Take 1  
million operations, which can be typical in many cases, and you have  
1 seconds vs 2 second now. For a large job like compiling a large  
application, that could mean a difference of 10 minutes vs 20  
minutes, which is rather more significant. My question is: Why do you  
have to choose? "Fast" and "Stable" are not mutually exclusive, and  
you can even do fast and flashy and stable at the same time. It's all  
about how you go about it. As for the security features of the  
language, well I'm not so sure about that, but there must be some  
developed language that has what you require, or at least one that  
has all but an stl. An stl might be a pain to write, but it's not  
that big of a deal after working on a kernel for a year. Once you  
write it, you might add to it later or fix it, but you won't have to  
go back and rewrite it again, and writing your own stl means you can  
include functions to make life easy for you in meeting your specific  
needs with coyotos.

On Nov 27, 2006, at 9:16 PM, Tracy R Reed wrote:

> Jonathan S. Shapiro wrote:
>> I tend to agree, but "slightly slower" should certainly mean  
>> "within a
>> factor of two". Even on these fairly contrived benchmarks, we aren't
>> seeing a factor of two in far too many of the cases.
>
> Ah, but by saying "factor of two" instead of "2ms vs 1ms" we are  
> playing
> statistical games to make the difference seem big.
>
> Sort of like how a certain chemical might "double" your risk of cancer
> which in reality means from .0002% to .0004%.
>
> Even if it were 20ms vs 1ms it still wouldn't be a big deal. I can
> afford to wait 19ms longer if it means I can have the software to  
> use vs
> not having it or having it work correctly vs being buggy.
>
> -- 
> Tracy R Reed                  http://ultraviolet.org
> A: Because we read from top to bottom, left to right
> Q: Why should I start my reply below the quoted text
> _______________________________________________
> coyotos-dev mailing list
> coyotos-dev at smtp.coyotos.org
> http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/coyotos-dev