This is the mail archive of the
java@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the Java project.
Re: dynamic library cost (was RE: libtool, java woes)
- To: "Boehm, Hans" <hans_boehm at hp dot com>
- Subject: Re: dynamic library cost (was RE: libtool, java woes)
- From: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at albatross dot co dot nz>
- Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 13:16:05 +1200
- CC: "'Alexandre Oliva'" <aoliva at redhat dot com>, tromey at redhat dot com, Jeff Sturm <jsturm at one-point dot com>, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- References: <140D21516EC2D3119EE7009027876644049B5D4C@hplex1.hpl.hp.com>
"Boehm, Hans" wrote:
> I'm seeing significant overheads as a result of dynamic library calls. On a
> PII/300 machine, a (single-threaded) loop containing only free(malloc(8))
> runs more than 20% faster when it's linked statically. This is similar on
> an Itanium machine. I'm not sure how significant that is for typical C
> programs, nor how frequently something like libsupc++ is called. I believe
> it is currently very significant for libgcj and calls to the garbage
> collector library from libgcj.
Why don't we link the garbage collector into libgcj?
regards
[ bryce ]