From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2006-07-29T00:39:53+09:00
Subject: Re: For performance, write it in C - Part 2, comparing C, Ruby and Java

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 12:21:48AM +0900, Charles O Nutter wrote:
> 
> The limit is not arbitrary; it's to allow the JVM to maintain certain
> constraints over the memory used by incoming class definitions, since
> they're typically not garbage collected. It would not be advisable to allow
> loading an extremely large class definition into permanent memory space,
> eating up the entirety of the heap. Put your gigantic data in a separate
> file and load it at runtime.

I think you might be misunderstanding the usage of "arbitrary" here.  An
arbitrary limit, in uses such as this, is one where someone picks a
"magic number" as a limit.


> 
> I have no fear of C. I have fear of making C work everywhere, which I do not
> have to worry about with either Ruby or Java. I also have a fear of C
> fanboys giving up on improving Ruby and always advising that people drop to
> C for their problems.

If you really believe there's no worry about portability of Java code,
you haven't been dealing with multiplatform, multi-VM Java deployments
enough.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
print substr("Just another Perl hacker", 0, -2);