Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com> writes:
On Wed, 11 Dec 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
I happen to have a Sparc 20 box and a Linux box and a SCO box, and ActiveX won't work on any of those. I also work with a bunch of other equipment that's much faster than a PC, but doesn't run browsers. (Most of it is not connected to the 'net for security reasons, but that's besides the point.)
Right, and Active X, if those machies were on the web, would not be supported.
That's what I said in line 1. Your point? (And of course if these machines were on the Web as servers, they could take advantage of ActiveX on clients.)
Interpreted FORTH bytestream (which is what Java is) may be "doing quite we when drawing GUI gizmos and widgets, but it can't get anywhere near the performance of hand-optimizer assembler that you can stick into ActiveX.
While ActiveX does support hand optmized assembler, there are Java JustInTime compilers which take JVM bytecodes and turn'em into raw assembler. They aren't hand optimized, they are natively compiled code, but they are native code non the less. A good optimizing compiler may
I've seen many Forth implementations, including pseudo-compilers similar to what you describe. They sure generated a lot of instructions and an occasional speed improvement over a simple-minded interpreter. Can it go out on the web and talk to arbitrary servers? Can it work with local files?
not be 100% as cool and as fast as hand optmized code, BUT it'll be almost as fast. And Java will run on just about EVERY platform out there. And that is a bigger, more important point than a 10%-25% increase in power over non-optimized code.
Where did the 10-25% figure come from? Of course, Ray works for Earthweb, who has a "special partnership" with SunSoft, and gets paid to badmouth competing products and push Java when it's clearly inappropriate. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps