At 02:01 24.05.00 -0700, Raab, Andreas wrote:

>of bucks for a C compiler. Good enough reason?! No? Well, for the second
>reason: Have a look at the tinyBenchmarks of a 2.7 and the new 2.8 VM.
>That'll convince you. OpenSource rules!

Well, the "1 tinyBenchmarks" numbers are quite impressive.  I get about 12% 
speedup in message sends and 70% in bytecodes.

However, when I do a "Time millisecondsToRun: [1 tinyBenchmarks]", the old 
VM is about 0.2 seconds (or 4%) faster, that is 4.8 instead of 5 seconds.

>Finally, a little survey: How do you guys think about distributing a 'fat'
>VM - that is a VM that has all the plugins builtin so that no extra plugin
>DLLs are needed?!

How fat is fat?  I'd like to see a very small VM without fancy stuff like 
sound, 3D and speech processing which can be used for Servers and which is 
as small as possible.  On the other hand, I don't really care about the 
size of the full featured VM as long as it's small compared to the image 
and source/changes size, let's say < 1M.

bye
--
Stefan Matthias Aust  //  Bevor wir fallen, fallen wir lieber auf