Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:05:38 -0800 From: Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> To: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> Cc: Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>, absinthe@pobox.com, shanon loveridge <shanon_loveridge@yahoo.co.uk>, freebsd-java@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: jdk1.3.1p5 Message-ID: <20011211230538.GA2264@gnuppy> In-Reply-To: <15382.20310.915394.242516@caddis.yogotech.com> References: <20011210001702.10731.qmail@web14303.mail.yahoo.com> <20011210024138.GA3148@gnuppy> <20011209223635.A1152@absinthe> <15380.15272.167683.46148@caddis.yogotech.com> <20011211103039.GA8233@gnuppy> <15382.20310.915394.242516@caddis.yogotech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Dec 11, 2001 at 11:24:22AM -0700, Nate Williams wrote: > I disagree, but we're all entitled to our own opinions. We don't need > HotSpot in order to be 'real'. Well, not to pressure this point too much further, but the reason why I'm doing this in the first place is because of what I've heard in the general JVM community about the need for HotSpot under the BSDs and that this need is critical for their operations. Under those assertions, it's seen by those folks as critical and I happened to agree with them about it. The bytecode interpreter is fast, but this is server side deployment I'm talking about and it's needed for setups that have high CPU load. The stature and technical origins of that compiler alone are significant enough to make it a key observable public piece in which people use to evaluate the JVM under FreeBSD. That's ultimately what I mean by "real". Those reason should be good enough that it should make getting native threading and HotSpot a very high priority item. That's all I've got to say on the subject. ;-) bill To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011211230538.GA2264>