Java vs Python Benchmarks: Java is faster
Steve Holden
sholden at holdenweb.com
Fri Feb 1 17:57:02 EST 2002
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Fri Feb 1 17:57:02 EST 2002
- Previous message (by thread): Java vs Python Benchmarks: Java is faster
- Next message (by thread): Java vs Python Benchmarks: Java is faster
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
<brueckd at tbye.com> wrote ... > On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Anders Dahlberg wrote: > > <brueckd at tbye.com> skrev i meddelandet > > > [Python/Java execution mechanisms] > > > was curious to know how slow Java was without the JIT. Finally, even > > > though Java and Python are wildly different in many ways, knowing the > > > interpreted vs. JIT'ed speeds might give a little insight into the > > > potential benefits of a Python JIT. > > > > I don't really know if python needs a jit, it would probably not harm > > python, but is it really worth the effort? > > Heehee... that's the whole reason I asked my question in the first place. > Without any introduction of static typing into the language, it's extremely unlikely that a JIT would yield the same benefits as it does for Java, although recent experiments with compiler techniques have shown interesting speedups on restricted cases. The major problem is that with dynamic (latent) typing, the JIT code has to examine the type of its operands in order to determine which of several type-based operations to perform. Java can avoid this due to its strong typing mechanism. But let's not forget: "Java is the COBOL of the object-oriented world". regards Steve -- Consulting, training, speaking: http://www.holdenweb.com/ Python Web Programming: http://pydish.holdenweb.com/pwp/
- Previous message (by thread): Java vs Python Benchmarks: Java is faster
- Next message (by thread): Java vs Python Benchmarks: Java is faster
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list