Search Results

Search found 4670 results on 187 pages for 'jvm arguments'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 33/187 | < Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >

  • Building argv and argc

    - by Wylie Coyote SG.
    I'm a student programmer using Qt to build a GUI application for work. The primary purpose of this application is to open some of our old style files, allows better editing and then save the file in a new format and file extension. Recently I have been asked to allow this conversion to take place from a terminal. While I do know what argv and argc are along with what they represent I am unsure how to accomplish what they want. For instance how to handle relative paths vs. absolute... maybe how to get absolute from relative; perhaps none of that is even needed. My programming experience has been primarily with guis so this is a little new to me. Users would like the following to be ran from the terminal application -o /fileLocation /fileDestination template(to determine new format) I began to use for loops and if statements to begin accomplishing this when I relized that I might be taking the worng approach to all of this. I WOULD ALSO BE REALLY INTERESTED IF QT HAS SOMETHING FOR THIS! Here is what I have began coming up with: int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { if(argc > 1) { for(int i = 0; i < argc; i++) { if(argv[i] == "-c") { QString fileName = QString::fromStdString(argv[i+1]); QString fileDestination = QString::fromStdString(argv[i+2]); QString templateName = QString::fromStdString(argv[i+3]); QFile fileToConvert(fileName); if(fileToConvert.open(QFile::ReadOnly)) { //do stuff Thanks for reading my post and a big thanks for any contributions you make to helping me overcome this issue.

    Read the article

  • How is a constructor executed?

    - by simion
    I am doing some reviison from the lecture slides and it says a constructor is executed in the following way; If the constructor starts with this, recursively execute the indicated constructor, then go to step 4. Invoke the explicitly or implicitly indicated superclass constructor (unless this class is java.lang.Object) Initialise the fields of the object in the order in which they were declared in this class Execute the rest of the body of this constructor. What i dont undertsand is that, a constructor can never "start" with this, because even if it forms no class heirarchy/relationship then super() is inserted by default. How would this fit in with the description above? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How does * work in Python

    - by Deqing
    Just switched from C++ to Python, and found that sometimes it is a little hard to understand ideas behind Python. I guess, a variable is a reference to the real object. For example, a=(1,2,5) meaning a - (1,2,5), so if b=a, then b and a are 2 references pointing to the same (1,2,5). It is a little like pointers in C/C++. If I have: def foo(a,b,c): print a,b,c a=(1,3,5) foo(*a) What does * mean here? Looks like it expands tuple a to a[0], a[1] and a[2]. But why print(*a) is not working while print(a[0],a[1],a[2]) works fine?

    Read the article

  • Failed to create symbolic link to keytool

    - by mt0s
    Keytool is /usr/bin/keytool and points to /etc/alternatives/keytool which in turn points to /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk-i386/jre/bin/keytool. Now I have installed java version 1.7.0_45 so I need to change keytool to the new path : /usr/lib/jvm/jdk1.7.0_45/jre/bin/keytool I tried deleting the /usr/bin/keytool with rm -rf and then adding a new link like : sudo ln -s /usr/bin/keytool /usr/lib/jvm/jdk1.7.0_45/jre/bin/keytool but what I get is ln: failed to create symbolic link `/usr/lib/jvm/jdk1.7.0_45/jre/bin/keytool': File exists I also tried : sudo update-alternatives --config keytool There is only one alternative in link group keytool: /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk-i386/jre/bin/keytool Nothing to configure. update-alternatives: warning: forcing reinstallation of alternative /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk-i386/jre/bin/keytool because link group keytool is broken. but doesn't works too. Any suggestions ? Thank you

    Read the article

  • set default java version

    - by Dónal
    I have been using Java 6 on Ubuntu 11.10, but now I want to update to version 7. I've installed version 7 via PPA as described here. If I run sudo update-alternatives --config java I get the following output: There are 2 choices for the alternative java (providing /usr/bin/java). Selection Path Priority Status ------------------------------------------------------------ 0 /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-oracle/jre/bin/java 64 auto mode 1 /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/jre/bin/java 63 manual mode * 2 /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-oracle/jre/bin/java 64 manual mode Similarly, if I run: sudo update-alternatives --config javac I get the output: Selection Path Priority Status ------------------------------------------------------------ 0 /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-oracle/bin/javac 64 auto mode 1 /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun/bin/javac 63 manual mode * 2 /usr/lib/jvm/java-7-oracle/bin/javac 64 manual mode So it looks like version 7 is already the default. But if I run either java -version or javac -version The output indicates that version 6 is still the default. How can I set the default to version 7?

    Read the article

  • Get JVM to grow memory demand as needed up to size of VM limit?

    - by Ira Baxter
    We ship a Java application whose memory demand can vary quite a lot depending on the size of the data it is processing. If you don't set the max VM (virtual memory) size, quite often the JVM quits with an GC failure on big data. What we'd like to see, is the JVM requesting more memory, as GC fails to provide enough, until the total available VM is exhausted. e.g., start with 128Mb, and increase geometrically (or some other step) whenever the GC failed. The JVM ("Java") command line allows explicit setting of max VM sizes (various -Xm* commands), and you'd think that would be designed to be adequate. We try to do this in a .cmd file that we ship with the application. But if you pick any specific number, you get one of two bad behaviors: 1) if your number is small enough to work on most target systems (e.g., 1Gb), it isn't big enough for big data, or 2) if you make it very large, the JVM refuses to run on those systems whose actual VM is smaller than specified. How does one set up Java to use the available VM when needed, without knowing that number in advance, and without grabbing it all on startup?

    Read the article

  • Arguments? Path filing wrong? [on hold]

    - by user3034947
    I'm working through the Java SE 7 programming activity and I'm having trouble sort of understanding how arguments work. Here's the code: public class CopyFileTree implements FileVisitor<Path> { private Path source; private Path target; public CopyFileTree(Path source, Path target) { this.source = source; this.target = target; } @Override public FileVisitResult preVisitDirectory(Path dir, BasicFileAttributes attrs) { // Your code goes here Path newdir = target.resolve(source.relativize(dir)); try { Files.copy(dir, newdir); } catch (FileAlreadyExistsException x) { // ignore } catch (IOException x) { System.err.format("Unable to create: %s: %s%n", newdir, x); return SKIP_SUBTREE; } return CONTINUE; } @Override public FileVisitResult visitFile(Path file, BasicFileAttributes attrs ) { // Your code goes here Path newdir = target.resolve(source.relativize(file)); try { Files.copy(file, newdir, REPLACE_EXISTING); } catch (IOException x) { System.err.format("Unable to copy: %s: %s%n", source, x); } return CONTINUE; } @Override public FileVisitResult postVisitDirectory(Path dir, IOException exc ) { return CONTINUE; } @Override public FileVisitResult visitFileFailed(Path file, IOException exc ) { if (exc instanceof FileSystemLoopException) { System.err.println("cycle detected: " + file); } else { System.err.format("Unable to copy: %s: %s%n", file, exc); } return CONTINUE; } } It says to test this I need to enter arguments in properties of the project which I did? Can someone clarity what I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • In a distributed environment, how can I configure log4j to log to different files for each JVM insta

    - by Renan Mozone
    My application runs on IBM WebSphere 6.1 Network Deployment. The application have several JSP files and Java classes. Today each host have only one JVM instance but my intention is to start another instance on each host. How can I configure log4j to log to different files for each JVM instance in the same host? I thought of using variable substitution on log4j XML configuration file but it only works with system properties. So, it is safe and recommended to set a custom system property just to store the JVM name? Anyone knows another strategy to achieve this in a 'elegant' way?

    Read the article

  • How "duplicated" Java code is optimized by the JVM JIT compiler?

    - by Renan Vinícius Mozone
    I'm in charge of maintaining a JSP based application, running on IBM WebSphere 6.1 (IBM J9 JVM). All JSP pages have a static include reference and in this include file there is some static Java methods declared. They are included in all JSP pages to offer an "easy access" to those utility static methods. I know that this is a very bad way to work, and I'm working to change this. But, just for curiosity, and to support my effort in changing this, I'm wondering how these "duplicated" static methods are optimized by the JVM JIT compiler. They are optimized separately even having the exact same signature? Does the JVM JIT compiler "sees" that these methods are all identical an provides an "unified" JIT'ed code?

    Read the article

  • How to allow for modular development while still running in same JVM?

    - by Marcus
    Our current app runs in a single JVM. We are now splitting up the app into separate logical services where each service runs in its own JVM. The split is being done to allow a single service to be modified and deployed without impacting the entire system. This reduces the need to QA the entire system - just need to QA the interaction with the service being changed. For interservice communication we use a combination of REST, an MQ system bus, and database views. What I don't like about this: REST means we have to marshal data to/from XML DB views couple the systems together which defeats the whole concept of separate services MQ / system bus is added complexity There is inevitably some code duplication between services You have set up n JBoss server configurations, we have to do n number of deployments, n number of set up scripts, etc, etc. Is there a better way to structure an internal application to allow modular development and deployment while allowing the app to run in a single JVM (and achieving the associated benefits)?

    Read the article

  • Allow for modular development while still running in same JVM?

    - by Marcus
    Our current app runs in a single JVM. We are now splitting up the app into separate logical services where each service runs in its own JVM. The split is being done to allow a single service to be modified and deployed without impacting the entire system. This reduces the need to QA the entire system - just need to QA the interaction with the service being changed. For inter service communication we use a combination of REST, an MQ system bus, and database views. What I don't like about this: REST means we have to marshal data to/from XML DB views couple the systems together which defeats the whole concept of separate services MQ / system bus is added complexity There is inevitably some code duplication between services You have set up n JBoss server configurations, we have to do n number of deployments, n number of set up scripts, etc, etc. Is there a better way to structure an internal application to allow modular development and deployment while allowing the app to run in a single JVM (and achieving the associated benefits)?

    Read the article

  • JavaOne 2012: Nashorn Edition

    - by $utils.escapeXML($entry.author)
    As with my JavaOne 2012: OpenJDK Edition post a while back (now updated to reflect the schedule of the talks), I find it convenient to have my JavaOne schedule ordered by subjects of interest. Beside OpenJDK in all its flavors, another subject I find very exciting is Nashorn. I blogged about the various material on Nashorn in the past, and we interviewed Jim Laskey, the Project Lead on Project Nashorn in the Java Spotlight podcast. So without further ado, here are the JavaOne 2012 talks and BOFs with Nashorn in their title, or abstract:CON5390 - Nashorn: Optimizing JavaScript and Dynamic Language Execution on the JVM - Monday, Oct 1, 8:30 AM - 9:30 AMThere are many implementations of JavaScript, meant to run either on the JVM or standalone as native code. Both approaches have their respective pros and cons. The Oracle Nashorn JavaScript project is based on the former approach. This presentation goes through the performance work that has gone on in Oracle’s Nashorn JavaScript project to date in order to make JavaScript-to-bytecode generation for execution on the JVM feasible. It shows that the new invoke dynamic bytecode gets us part of the way there but may not quite be enough. What other tricks did the Nashorn project use? The presentation also discusses future directions for increased performance for dynamic languages on the JVM, covering proposed enhancements to both the JVM itself and to the bytecode compiler.CON4082 - Nashorn: JavaScript on the JVM - Monday, Oct 1, 3:00 PM - 4:00 PMThe JavaScript programming language has been experiencing a renaissance of late, driven by the interest in HTML5. Nashorn is a JavaScript engine implemented fully in Java on the JVM. It is based on the Da Vinci Machine (JSR 292) and will be available with JDK 8. This session describes the goals of Project Nashorn, gives a top-level view of how it all works, provides the current status, and demonstrates examples of JavaScript and Java working together.BOF4763 - Meet the Nashorn JavaScript Team - Tuesday, Oct 2, 4:30 PM - 5:15 PMCome to this session to meet the Oracle JavaScript (Project Nashorn) language teamBOF6661 - Nashorn, Node, and Java Persistence - Tuesday, Oct 2, 5:30 PM - 6:15 PMWith Project Nashorn, developers will have a full and modern JavaScript engine available on the JVM. In addition, they will have support for running Node applications with Node.jar. This unique combination of capabilities opens the door for best-of-breed applications combining Node with Java SE and Java EE. In this session, you’ll learn about Node.jar and how it can be combined with Java EE components such as EclipseLink JPA for rich Java persistence. You’ll also hear about all of Node.jar’s mapping, caching, querying, performance, and scaling features.CON10657 - The Polyglot Java VM and Java Middleware - Thursday, Oct 4, 12:30 PM - 1:30 PMIn this session, Red Hat and Oracle discuss the impact of polyglot programming from their own unique perspectives, examining non-Java languages that utilize Oracle’s Java HotSpot VM. You’ll hear a discussion of topics relating to Ruby, Lisp, and Clojure and the intersection of other languages where they may touch upon individual frameworks and projects, and you’ll get perspectives on JavaScript via the Nashorn Project, an upcoming JavaScript engine, developed fully in Java.CON5251 - Putting the Metaobject Protocol to Work: Nashorn’s Java Bindings - Thursday, Oct 4, 2:00 PM - 3:00 PMProject Nashorn is Oracle’s new JavaScript runtime in Java 8. Being a JavaScript runtime running on the JVM, it provides integration with the underlying runtime by enabling JavaScript objects to manipulate Java objects, implement Java interfaces, and extend Java classes. Nashorn is invokedynamic-based, and for its Java integration, it does away with the concept of wrapper objects in favor of direct virtual machine linking to Java objects’ methods provided by a metaobject protocol, providing much higher performance than what could be expected from a scripting runtime. This session looks at the details of the integration, a topic of interest to other language implementers on the JVM and a wider audience of developers who want to understand how Nashorn works.That's 6 sessions tooting the Nashorn this year at JavaOne, up from 2 last year.

    Read the article

  • How are the conceptual pairs Abstract/Concrete, Generic/Specific, and Complex/Simple related to one another in software architecture?

    - by tjb1982
    (= 2 (+ 1 1)) take the above. The requirement of the '=' predicate is that its arguments be comparable. Any two structures are comparable in this case, and so the contract/requirement is pretty generic. The '+' predicate requires that its arguments be numbers. That's more specific. (socket domain type protocol) the arguments here are much more specific (even though the arguments are still just numbers and the function itself returns a file descriptor, which is itself an int), but the arguments are more abstract, and the implementation is built up from other functions whose abstractions are less abstract, which are themselves built from less and less abstract abstractions. To the point where the requirements are something like move from one location to another, observe whether the switch at that location is on or off, turn the switch on or off, or leave it the same, etc. But are functions also less and less complex the less abstract they are? And is there a relationship between the number and range of arguments of a function and the complexity of its implementation, as you go from more abstract to less abstract, and vice versa? (= 2 (+ 1 1) 2r10) the '=' predicate is more generic than the '+' predicate, and thus could be more complex in its implementation. The '+' predicate's contract is less generic, and so could be less complex in its implementation. Is this even a little correct? What about the 'socket' function? Each of those arguments is a number of some kind. What they represent, though, is something more elaborate. It also returns a number (just like the others do), which is also a representation of something conceptually much more elaborate than a number. To boil it down, I'm asking if there is a relationship between the following dimensions, and why: Abstract/Concrete Complex/Simple Generic/Specific And more specifically, do different configurations of these dimensions have a specific, measurable impact on the number and range of the arguments (i.e., the contract) of a function?

    Read the article

  • What are the arguments against parsing the Cthulhu way?

    - by smarmy53
    I have been assigned the task of implementing a Domain Specific Language for a tool that may become quite important for the company. The language is simple but not trivial, it already allows nested loops, string concatenation, etc. and it is practically sure that other constructs will be added as the project advances. I know by experience that writing a lexer/parser by hand -unless the grammar is trivial- is a time consuming and error prone process. So I was left with two options: a parser generator à la yacc or a combinator library like Parsec. The former was good as well but I picked the latter for various reasons, and implemented the solution in a functional language. The result is pretty spectacular to my eyes, the code is very concise, elegant and readable/fluent. I concede it may look a bit weird if you never programmed in anything other than java/c#, but then this would be true of anything not written in java/c#. At some point however, I've been literally attacked by a co-worker. After a quick glance at my screen he declared that the code is uncomprehensible and that I should not reinvent parsing but just use a stack and String.Split like everybody does. He made a lot of noise, and I could not convince him, partially because I've been taken by surprise and had no clear explanation, partially because his opinion was immutable (no pun intended). I even offered to explain him the language, but to no avail. I'm positive the discussion is going to re-surface in front of management, so I'm preparing some solid arguments. These are the first few reasons that come to my mind to avoid a String.Split-based solution: you need lot of ifs to handle special cases and things quickly spiral out of control lots of hardcoded array indexes makes maintenance painful extremely difficult to handle things like a function call as a method argument (ex. add( (add a, b), c) very difficult to provide meaningful error messages in case of syntax errors (very likely to happen) I'm all for simplicity, clarity and avoiding unnecessary smart-cryptic stuff, but I also believe it's a mistake to dumb down every part of the codebase so that even a burger flipper can understand it. It's the same argument I hear for not using interfaces, not adopting separation of concerns, copying-pasting code around, etc. A minimum of technical competence and willingness to learn is required to work on a software project after all. (I won't use this argument as it will probably sound offensive, and starting a war is not going to help anybody) What are your favorite arguments against parsing the Cthulhu way?* *of course if you can convince me he's right I'll be perfectly happy as well

    Read the article

  • What arguments can I use to "sell" the BDD concept to a team reluctant to adopt it?

    - by S.Robins
    I am a bit of a vocal proponent of the BDD methodology. I've been applying BDD for a couple of years now, and have adopted StoryQ as my framework of choice when developing DotNet applications. Even though I have been unit testing for many years, and had previously shifted to a test-first approach, I've found that I get much more value out of using a BDD framework, because my tests capture the intent of the requirements in relatively clear English within my code, and because my tests can execute multiple assertions without ending the test halfway through - meaning I can see which specific assertions pass/fail at a glance without debugging to prove it. This has really been the tip of the iceberg for me, as I've also noticed that I am able to debug both test and implementation code in a more targeted manner, with the result that my productivity has grown significantly, and that I can more easily determine where a failure occurs if a problem happens to make it all the way to the integration build due to the output that makes its way into the build logs. Further, the StoryQ api has a lovely fluent syntax that is easy to learn and which can be applied in an extraordinary number of ways, requiring no external dependencies in order to use it. So with all of these benefits, you would think it an easy to introduce the concept to the rest of the team. Unfortunately, the other team members are reluctant to even look at StoryQ to evaluate it properly (let alone entertain the idea of applying BDD), and have convinced each other to try and remove a number of StoryQ elements from our own core testing framework, even though they originally supported the use of StoryQ, and that it doesn't impact on any other part of our testing system. Doing so would end up increasing my workload significantly overall and really goes against the grain, as I am convinced through practical experience that it is a better way to work in a test-first manner in our particular working environment, and can only lead to greater improvements in the quality of our software, given I've found it easier to stick with test first using BDD. So the question really comes down to the following: What arguments can I use to really drive the point home that it would be better to use StoryQ, or at the very least apply the BDD methodology? Can you point me to any anecdotal evidence that I can use to support my argument to adopt BDD as our standard method of choice? What counter arguments can you think of that could suggest that my wish to convert the team efforts to BDD might be in error? Yes, I'm happy to be proven wrong provided the argument is a sound one. NOTE: I am not advocating that we rewrite our tests in their entirety, but rather to simply start working in a different manner for all future testing work.

    Read the article

  • Is there any reason in a Java program for a special naming for a function arguments?

    - by gasan
    I'd like to know, why would I want to have a special prefixes for a function arguments, like "p_name", "p_age", "p_sex"? On the one hand it helps to distinguish parameter from local variable or field further in the function body, but would it help? On the other hand, I didn't saw such naming recommendations anywhere including official Java language conventions. Please advise any reasons for using such naming policy

    Read the article

  • Does Process.StartInfo.Arguments support a UTF-8 string?

    - by Patrick Klug
    Can you use a UTF-8 string as the Arguments for a StartInfo? I am trying to pass a UTF-8 (in this case a Japanese string) to an application as a console argument. Something like this (this is just an example! (cmd.exe would be a custom app)) var process = new System.Diagnostics.Process(); process.StartInfo.Arguments = "/K \"echo ????????\""; process.StartInfo.FileName = "cmd.exe"; process.StartInfo.UseShellExecute = true; process.Start(); process.WaitForExit(); Executing this seems to loose the UTF-8 string and all the target application sees is "echo ?????????" When executing this command directly on the command line (by pasting the arguments) the target application receives the string correctly even though the command line itself doesn't seem to display it correctly. Do I need to do anything special to enable UTF-8 support in the arguments or is this just not supported?

    Read the article

  • reduce memory footprint of java virtual machine

    - by Lorenzo Boccaccia
    I've a citrix server where multiple users use a multiple java application. Is there a way to reduce the memory footprint of the jvm itself? The max heap is already set fairly low (64MB), as the permgen (32MB) space and we're to the point that the jvm itself uses way more memory than the application itself (the committed area is around 350MB) I'm looking for a way to reduce the jvm ram usage or to make the all the applications run within the same jvm or any other way of sharing common pages between running jvm (if possible) or try switch to switch to a jvm if a jvm exists having optimizations relative to this scenario currently using windows 2003 server and sun java virtual machine 1.6

    Read the article

  • Talking JavaOne with Rock Star Charles Nutter

    - by Janice J. Heiss
    JavaOne Rock Stars, conceived in 2005, are the top rated speakers from the JavaOne Conference. They are awarded by their peers who through conference surveys recognize them for their outstanding sessions and speaking ability. Over the years many of the world’s leading Java developers have been so recognized.We spoke with distinguished Rock Star, Charles Nutter. A JRuby Update from Charles NutterCharles Nutter of Red Hat is well known as a lead developer of JRuby, a Ruby implementation of Java that is tightly integrated with Java to allow for the embedding of the interpreter into any Java application with full two-way access between the Java and the Ruby code. Nutter is giving the following sessions at this year’s JavaOne: CON7257 – “JVM Bytecode for Dummies (and the Rest of Us Too)” CON7284 – “Implementing Ruby: The Long, Hard Road” CON7263 – “JVM JIT for Dummies” BOF6682 – “I’ve Got 99 Languages, but Java Ain’t One” CON6575 – “Polyglot for Dummies” (Both with Thomas Enebo) I asked Nutter, to give us the latest on JRuby. “JRuby seems to have hit a tipping point this past year,” he explained, “moving from ‘just another Ruby implementation’ to ‘the best Ruby implementation for X,’ where X may be performance, scaling, big data, stability, reliability, security, and a number of other features important for today's applications. We're currently wrapping up JRuby 1.7, which improves support for Ruby 1.9 APIs, solves a number of user issues and concurrency challenges, and utilizes invokedynamic to outperform all other Ruby implementations by a wide margin. JRuby just gets better and better.” When asked what he thought about the rapid growth of alternative languages for the JVM, he replied, “I'm very intrigued by efforts to bring a high-performance JavaScript runtime to the JVM. There's really no reason the JVM couldn't be the fastest platform for running JavaScript with the right implementation, and I'm excited to see that happen.”And what is Nutter working on currently? “Aside from JRuby 1.7 wrap-up,” he explained, “I'm helping the Hotspot developers investigate invokedynamic performance issues and test-driving their new invokedynamic code in Java 8. I'm also starting to explore ways to improve the general state of dynamic languages on the JVM using JRuby as a guide, and to help the JVM become a better platform for all kinds of languages.”

    Read the article

  • Talking JavaOne with Rock Star Charles Nutter

    - by Janice J. Heiss
    JavaOne Rock Stars, conceived in 2005, are the top rated speakers from the JavaOne Conference. They are awarded by their peers who through conference surveys recognize them for their outstanding sessions and speaking ability. Over the years many of the world’s leading Java developers have been so recognized.We spoke with distinguished Rock Star, Charles Nutter. A JRuby Update from Charles NutterCharles Nutter of Red Hat is well known as a lead developer of JRuby, a Ruby implementation of Java that is tightly integrated with Java to allow for the embedding of the interpreter into any Java application with full two-way access between the Java and the Ruby code. Nutter is giving the following sessions at this year’s JavaOne: CON7257 – “JVM Bytecode for Dummies (and the Rest of Us Too)” CON7284 – “Implementing Ruby: The Long, Hard Road” CON7263 – “JVM JIT for Dummies” BOF6682 – “I’ve Got 99 Languages, but Java Ain’t One” CON6575 – “Polyglot for Dummies” (Both with Thomas Enebo) I asked Nutter, to give us the latest on JRuby. “JRuby seems to have hit a tipping point this past year,” he explained, “moving from ‘just another Ruby implementation’ to ‘the best Ruby implementation for X,’ where X may be performance, scaling, big data, stability, reliability, security, and a number of other features important for today's applications. We're currently wrapping up JRuby 1.7, which improves support for Ruby 1.9 APIs, solves a number of user issues and concurrency challenges, and utilizes invokedynamic to outperform all other Ruby implementations by a wide margin. JRuby just gets better and better.” When asked what he thought about the rapid growth of alternative languages for the JVM, he replied, “I'm very intrigued by efforts to bring a high-performance JavaScript runtime to the JVM. There's really no reason the JVM couldn't be the fastest platform for running JavaScript with the right implementation, and I'm excited to see that happen.”And what is Nutter working on currently? “Aside from JRuby 1.7 wrap-up,” he explained, “I'm helping the Hotspot developers investigate invokedynamic performance issues and test-driving their new invokedynamic code in Java 8. I'm also starting to explore ways to improve the general state of dynamic languages on the JVM using JRuby as a guide, and to help the JVM become a better platform for all kinds of languages.” Originally published on blogs.oracle.com/javaone.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40  | Next Page >