From koffice-devel Sun Jan 22 15:11:31 2006 From: Martin Ellis Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 15:11:31 +0000 To: koffice-devel Subject: Re: Linux Format: KSpread "disaster area" Message-Id: <200601221511.31481.martin.ellis () kdemail ! net> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=koffice-devel&m=113794272910287 On Sunday 22 January 2006 01:00, kent@mslinux.com wrote: > The same result, here's what I get for a C++ program. > Can you provide me a convincing argument why my "Hello World" C++ > program is so > much much much much faster than my java "Hello World" program? Your C++ Hello World runs with absolutely no memory safety. Were it less trivial example it could crash, and for an embedded scripting language, that means crashing the host application too. That's no good in an office suite. The C++ program can run with no other security features, such ensuring it can't access the file system, dynamically load libraries, ... Furthermore, the C++ would need to be compiled every time a document was loaded. Different architectures have different object code formats, so you couldn't compile it once and leave the result in a document. But you didn't time how long it took to compile the C++ program, so you are comparing apples to oranges. You might as well compare Java applets to ActiveX controls. Java byte code can be executed with better memory safety and security, is portable across architectures, and byte code could be embedded in a document. There's also a good possibility that your C++ libraries are already mapped into memory when you invoke it, since there's probably something on your system already using them. On the other hand, since you're obviously not used to using Java, there's probably not a Java application already running, so the Java libraries need to be mapped in to memory when you invoke jamvm. Martin _______________________________________________ koffice-devel mailing list koffice-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel