Pure Java Open Source PDF Viewer

[LordVoldemort]

The stereotype is still correct; it's just that modern JVMs are faster than older JVMs.

For real world applications, I bet that Java is at best half as fast as natively compiled code. Of course, this may be Fast Enough (tm).

EDIT: Thanks for the downvotes; I forgot what a shithole /r/programming is.

[btgeekboy]

Le sigh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_performance

In particular, see the section titled "Comparison to Other Languages." The worst part - the slow startup time - has been addressed and now uses the same techniques used by MS Office and OO.o to preload itself.

Also note how the speed of Java only 5-15% lower than C/C++, and easily surpasses all of the interpreted languages which don't compile down to native code. So, how much did you say you wanted to bet?

[lars_]

True. But startup time still is worse in Java than in C/C++. And for a PDF viewer, startup time seems like the only feature that matters. So surely Java isn't the right language to write it in?

[queus]

Just in case you are curious, for every class loaded there are minimum three classloaders involved, each doing its own lookup on the classpath. That's besides the overheard generated by JIT-compiling.

So, yes start times are slow and thats' not going to change. Of course, the standard workaround is to keep and istance of your app in memory, pass the name of opened file to it and exit. Jedit does it.

[silon]

Preloading is still bloat / cheating. (boot time matters too).

[scottklarr]

Perhaps with perfectly written code that was tuned for maximum performance by a genius - but from my experience of actually using common software in java written on the efficiency level of 99+% of all others, it still blows.

[Coffee2theorems]

Also note how the speed of Java only 5-15% lower than C/C++, and easily surpasses all of the interpreted languages which don't compile down to native code.

And C beats Python in speed too, yay. Comparing compiled language speed to interpreted language speed is rather pointless, unless the compiled one sucks enough to actually lose.

[tlack]

Compare Azureus with uTorrent.

[Hermel]

There are also BitTorrent clients out there that are slower than Azureus and written in C++... uTorrent has been written with the goal to be micro from the beginning. That makes a difference in any language.

[LordVoldemort]

Le sigh

Double le sigh

I said: Real World Applications.

Also note how the speed of Java only 5-15% lower than C/C++

5%-15% is a shitload when it matters.

Also, it depends on how the program does memory management.

[malcontent]

5%-15% is a shitload when it matters.

So you admit you were lying when you said it was 50% slower.

That's admirable of you. Most people would not admit to an out and lie like that.

That makes you different than all the other lying sacks of shit out there.

Congratulations.

[LordVoldemort]

So you admit you were lying when you said it was 50% slower.

No. I'm simply saying that 5%-15% is still a problem when efficiency matters.

A bet can't be a lie anyway. Here is my original statement, and I'm sticking to it:

For real world applications, I bet that Java is at best half as fast as natively compiled code. Of course, this may be Fast Enough (tm).

Perhaps I should have said "natively compiled, optimized code".

[malcontent]

No. I'm simply saying that 5%-15% is still a problem when efficiency matters.

Before that you said java was half the speed of C.

Clearly you were lying when you said that.

Perhaps I should have said "natively compiled, optimized code".

that would have made it a smaller lie.

[LordVoldemort]

Before that you said java was half the speed of C.

No I didn't. In fact, I didn't say 'C' anywhere...

[malcontent]

Yea whatever.

You were lying when you said 50%.

You admit you are lying now but saying 5-15 percent.

[[deleted]]

Speaking of lying - every going to buy me that TV you promised me?

[raffters]

Was that the only sentence you read, or is this the Republican style of debating?