On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 16:32 -0500, Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: >On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 22:24 +0100, Ziga Mahkovec wrote: >>On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 11:38 -0500, Thomas Fitzsimmons wrote: >>> On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 15:04 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: >>> >I see. Of course, I have no idea why tools.jar is attempting to use >>> >the gcjlib:// class loader, or why it is so slow when it does. It >>> >really should not explicitly use this class loader. >>> >>> I doesn't any more. We were doing that to avoid having to always add >>> jdtcore.jar to the classpath. I also have no idea why it's so slow but >>> I did notice a significant performance hit when compared to interpreted >>> mode. >>> >>> Ziga, you can get the sources for java-gcj-compat from >>> sources.redhat.com: >> >>Ah, much better, thanks. Here are the revised times (BTW, that's a >>1.5GHz Pentium M): >> >>HelloWorld >> >>ecj | ecj-native | jikes >>------------------------------------------------------------- >>real 0m1.863s | real 0m1.614s | real 0m0.067s >>user 0m1.758s | user 0m1.536s | user 0m0.050s >>sys 0m0.103s | sys 0m0.076s | sys 0m0.012s >> >> >>GNU Classpath (cd lib; make) >> >>ecj | ecj-native | jikes >>------------------------------------------------------------- >>real 1m24.539s | real 0m24.552s | real 0m9.439s >>user 1m23.157s | user 0m23.047s | user 0m7.486s >>sys 0m1.142s | sys 0m1.139s | sys 0m0.771s >> >> > >What release of eclipse-ecj are you using? Just recently we were able >to build Eclipse with -O2 on x86. I'm not sure if the new packages have >hit rawhide yet. > They'll be in rawhide tomorrow. Release 3.1.0_fc-0.M5.12 or 3.1.0_fc-0.M5.13. Tom
