>[log in to unmask] wrote: >> >> Essentially any criticism of Java's performance must be aimed at the JVM. >> Ultimately, as long as Java runs on the JVM, it is *never* going to be as >> quick as a compiled-to-native-code language. >I don't agree with this since the latest JVMs essentially compile >to native code at runtime anyway. Err - surely that means it is going to take longer if it has to compiler to native code at runtime ? >There are a number of obstacles to good Java performance. >The first is that the language design only allows classes, the only form >of >abstraction provided, to be allocated on the heap. Sun's JVM >has a very fast allocator. I have found Java code will give "native" >code >a run for its money if both are doing similar amounts of heap >allocation. Related to this is the problem of the garbage collector, which again is going to degrade performance. John ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender immediately by telephoning +44(1252) 373232. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ********************************************************************