Stephen Pelc  wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 14:16:45 GMT, Pabst Blue Ribbon
>  wrote:
>
>> They doing it in an attempt to catch up with languages such as C and C++ in
>> terms of speed. Java, for example, have no problems with byte code (which,
>> in essence, just another name for threaded code.) If  I understand
>> correctly, it still should be possible to use code optimizations with
>> threaded code or even generate mixed threaded and native code
>> automatically.
>
> What would the benefits be of mixing threaded and native code?
>
> Especially in embedded systems, speed is always an advantage.
> Among other things, efficient code generation reduces power
> consumption. For the last 15 years or so, I have not written
> an ARM/Cortex interrupt handler in assembler - I just let
> the compiler do its job. For reasons like this, our TCP/IP
> stack contains no assembler (unless you want it) and runs
> on a range of CPU architectures.
>
> Stephen
>

If there is a useful code size reduction in threaded code (or fully
interpreted code), then there can be a considerable reduction in code size
with little or no reduction in performance.

This is so because relatively large fractions of many programs (think
systems programs) are executed rarely, only on exceptional conditions.

It is unusual to exploit this frequency disparity in conventional compiled
programs, but JIT compilation and profile-directed optimization can both
gain advantages from it.

--
-michael - NadaNet 3.1 and AppleCrate II:  http://michaeljmahon.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05