C++ Interpreter

[Volker Simonis]

On 11/26/07, steve goldman <Steve.Goldman at sun.com> wrote:
> Volker Simonis wrote:
> > If you are interested in a performance comparison between the C++ and
> > the Template Interpreter you may want to read the following blog:
> >
> > http://weblogs.java.net/blog/simonis/archive/2007/11/template_vs_cin_1.html
> >
> > "Template- vs. C++-Interpreter shootout: This blog discusses the main
> > differences between the C++ and the Template Interpreter which are
> > both available within the Hotspot sources of the OpenJDK project. Some
> > performance tests with the DaCapo benchmark suite which compare the
> > two interpreters in mixed and interpreted mode on Linux/x86 and
> > Solaris/SPARC conclude the presentation."
> >
>
> Very cool. So the results are much different (worse) for Xmixed than I
> got in the long distant past. Server has certainly changed a lot in the
> interim. So what compiler did you use on Solaris? Considering how
> similar the numbers are between x86/sparc for -Xint it would seem that
> you might have used gcc. I used to see worse behavior on sparc because
> with gcc the interpreter could do the computed goto trick for the
> dispatch loop and that is worth a lot.
>

On Solaris I used SunStudio 11 (Sun C++ 5.8). So it seems SunStudio
has also improved...
On Linux I used gcc 4.1.0.

> Second if you have the time it would interesting to see the comparison
> using client.

We only use and supoprt C2, but let's see what I can do.
I'll drop you a note if I'll have the results...

>
> --
> Steve
>