[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
GNU classpath 0.09
From: |
Michael Koch |
Subject: |
GNU classpath 0.09 |
Date: |
Mon, 3 May 2004 17:18:07 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Hi Elliotte,
I just read your news about the recent GNU classpath 0.09 release. I'm
the one who wrote most of the java.nio, javax.print and javax.imageio
stuff in GNU classpath. I'm astonished about your writing. In your text
you wrote:
" It also delegates much of java.io to java.nio, which strikes me as a
colossally bad idea. java.nio really only works well for certain
important but still special purpose cases. It tends to be slower than
regular I/O for basic operations with small files. I wonder if
anyonne's actually profiled this?"
This somehow shows that you dont know the internals we have changed in
GNU classpath 0.09. You have not made any profiling work and assume
that things that may be right for other java.nio implementations apply
to GNU classpath's implementation too.
Before the change of java.io the classes FileInputStream,
FileOutputStream and RandomAccessFile in java.io redirected all his
calls to native methods in FileDescriptor. This class did all the hard
IO work. Now all these native methods where moved to
gnu.java.nio.channels.FileChannelImpl and the above three classes call
these directly instead. I really wonder why this should make java.io
slower just because the methods were moved to another class ?
From the text I quoted above I assume you have done no profiling or you
would know that it is not significant slower. You just apply your
experience with another implementation on GNU classpath.
Another thing I want to mention is that GNU classpath is NOT licensed
under LGPL. Its licensed under GPL+exception. Thats a big difference as
it allows the usage of GNU classpath in szenarious where LGPL would not
allow it. LGPL doesnt allows e.g. static linking, with the LGPL you
have to distribute things in a way that lets you replace the LGPL part
easily (so in practice that usually means the LGPL code must be in
an .so).
That is just my opinion about this news item and this mail is meant as
an offence against you or anyone else. It would be nice to make this
clear on your website cafeaulait as people might get opinions about GNU
classpath that are just wrong.
Cheers,
Michael
- GNU classpath 0.09,
Michael Koch <=