It was binutils indeed, thanks for the help. I now have two working JVMs for classpath! =) Anyways, cacao seems to be fairly similar to jamvm - results were within 10-20% with cacao generally faster, but slower on a few of the tests. I wouldn't call this a definitive test, though, it was just a quick run. It still places java & JNI overhead between 25% and 75%, depending on the shape. Then again, I'd never expect a java implementation to be as fast as a C/C++ one ;-) Francis On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 22:43 +0200, Christian Thalinger wrote: > On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 16:34 -0400, Francis Kung wrote: > > This was on JamVM with latest the classpath head. From an earlier > > benchmark, native code with GCJ didn't show much of a performance boost > > (but then again, it wasn't with the latest head). Cacao won't build on > > my machine (x86_64), but I might give it a try on my home machine. > > Will be out of town this coming week, though. > > Why does it not build? My machine is a x86_64 one too. /me supects > binutils-dev again. Grrr... > > TWISTI
