Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Java processors
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 01:13:06 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <jtfokt$iae$1@dont-email.me>
References: <5f101d00-4bc9-4750-939c-cd53605bfa0e@googlegroups.com> <jt4bqi$c2b$1@dont-email.me> <jt4kr2$mdd$1@news.albasani.net> <jt4mht$glm$1@dont-email.me> <4ff6318d$0$283$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <jt5okh$53a$1@dont-email.me> <9diev791cc84tsljqusgl14shpseba19o7@4ax.com> <djjev7565b8ctdboqn9t9h7nc0eqdu413m@4ax.com> <89ca24f7-0bf9-4d4b-be91-ef131989c4c9@googlegroups.com> <ma6fv7dr1u82acmp89ti4pjk3srnh3ts92@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 23:14:37 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="xODdX3GrRlvW7wSJQi4djg"; logging-data="18766"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19C7VZdIFLqZsRnKpf3rtT0"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.27) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/3.1.19
In-Reply-To: <ma6fv7dr1u82acmp89ti4pjk3srnh3ts92@4ax.com>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:k+gd53ulM/SA6fTq/l9f7FGfhMw=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:15903

On 07/07/2012 04:07, Roedy Green allegedly wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 14:17:40 -0700 (PDT), Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com>
> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
> 
>>
>> They don't do that exactly. There's no restart.
>>
>> <http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/hotspotfaq-138619.html#compiler_warmup>
> 
> " HotSpot contains On Stack Replacement technology which will compile
> a running (interpreted) method and replace it while it is still
> running in a loop. No need to waste your applications time warming up
> seemingly infinite (or very long running) loops in order to get better
> application performance."
> 
> It thus stops it is mid flight, possibly half way through a loop,
> writes machine code, creates the equivalent state/register, and picks
> up where it left off (what I ambiguously called restarting) but
> running machine code.  I can hardly believe this is possible,
> especially when you think about all the optimisations on the machine
> code.

Sounds to me like you could be misinterpreting that, Roedy. It says
"method... running in a loop". Not: loop running in a method. I'd rather
interpret that as being about a method running repeatedly in a loop.

Agree with the "walk on water" thing, though.

-- 
DF.