Re: [computer-go] Oh no...possible language superiority storm ahead...

[Vincent Diepeveen <diep@xxxxxxxxx>]

I have led several java projects. The comparisions in speed were done 2
weeks ago. Good programmers never say JAVA is fast. They know much better. 

Note that many chess engines are coded in assembly. I remember some go
programs life & death searches are too.

At 14:28 8-11-2004 -0800, Jim O'Flaherty, Jr. wrote:
>Vincent,
>
>Please refer to earlier messages talking about languages and speed.
Apparently your cached data
>about Java is quite stale.  Time to do a refresh.  ;^)
>
>No point in starting a language *war* thingy.  You use what you use.  He
uses what he uses. 
>Criticizing someone else's choice of language seems quite trite.
>
>
>Jim
>
>
>PS. JDK/JRE 1.4 or later Java code is now getting numeric performance on
par with or exceeding
>almost all C/C++ compilers excepting Intel's.
>
>
>--- Vincent Diepeveen <diep@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Wait a minute, you guys want to use the 3 times slower JAVA platform for
>> game programming?
>> 
>> You are not serious are you?
>> 
>> JAVA is great for connectivity and a quick programming of internet tools
>> and for server tools and interfaces.
>> 
>> But for the pure speed, i must refer this inferior compiler technology to
>> the outdated desk.
>> 
>> A complex program will be a factor 3 slower with it at least.
>> 
>> In fact small 30 line programs already are to my amazement not seldom up to
>> a factor 3 slower.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> At 19:49 8-11-2004 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> [mailto:computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Stuart A Yeates
>> >> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 18:58
>> >> To: computer-go
>> >> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Pattern Matcher
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Mark Boon wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I would be really interested if it would give a significant speedup.
>> >>  > In Java it's probably even more practical than in C, as it has the
>> >> > built-in capability of doing run-time compilation of the code and
>> >>  > load the compiled class run-time to replace the existing one.
>> >>
>> >> This is not true in the general case.
>> >>
>> >> While it is true that the Java standard libraries have a method for
>> >> calling the compiler, an implementation is not required to have a
>> >> compiler to be called. This is the key difference between Sun's JRE
>> >> (Java Runtime Envirnoment) which doesn't have a compiler and Sun's JDK
>> >> (Java Development Kit) which does.
>> >
>> >That could be. I did something like this some years ago, although it
was for
>> >a more mundane application for a bank. You don't necessarily need the JDK,
>> >just the 'tools' library.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Indeed, with the recent release of GNU's GCJ (Gnu Compiler for Java),
>> >> it's going to be increasingly frequent for the Java code to actually be
>> >> running as a pre-compiled binary executable.
>> >>
>> >> cheers
>> >> stuart
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> computer-go mailing list
>> >> computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>> >>
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >computer-go mailing list
>> >computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> computer-go mailing list
>> computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>computer-go mailing list
>computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>
>
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/