<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Inadvertent incorrectness &#187; Java</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/category/coding/java/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog</link>
	<description>... but that doesn&#039;t matter, because I turn it into a sexy dance</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:16:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Now with Java</title>
		<link>http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/2004/09/01/now-with-java/</link>
		<comments>http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/2004/09/01/now-with-java/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2004 20:58:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[C++]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Coding]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/?p=9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following up on the benchmark from yesterday, I&#8217;ve produced a Java version of the queens benchmark (queens.java). Below is the updated graph. I have a suspision that the reason Mono and Java is performing so bad is not only due &#8230; <a href="http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/2004/09/01/now-with-java/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Following up on the benchmark from yesterday, I&#8217;ve produced a Java version of the queens benchmark (<a href="http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/images/queens.java">queens.java</a>).  Below is the updated graph. I have a suspision that the reason Mono and Java is performing so bad is not only due to exceptions, but rather it has something to do with garbage collection.</p>
<p align="center"><a href="http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/images/queens-graph-v2.png"><img src="http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/images/queens-graph-v2-small.png" alt="Graph showing running times for the different executables"/></a></p>
<p>I also tried to improve the C++ version based on some hints I got from Asger and Søren (colleagues at Laerdal Sophus).  The C++ improvements worked really well when we tested them at work with Visual Studio&nbsp;6.0.  But the improvements had absolutely no effect when compiling with gcc 3.4.1. Either gcc is very smart or very stupid. Something suggest the later as a quick test reveals that gcc version 3.4.1 is producing worse code than version 3.3.4, which in turn is producing worse code than version 3.2.3 .  I guess that I&#8217;ll have to install Windows and the free Microsoft compilers, so that I can compare them against gcc and Mono.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://ken.friislarsen.net/blog/2004/09/01/now-with-java/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

