Talk:Java virtual machine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Old discussion

J2SE 5 is now knows as Java SE 5. Shouldn't that be changed?

http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5/index.jsp and other Sun pages still clearly show J2SE so I think it should not be changed to SE just yet.Harborsparrow 15:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

--- ToDo. Verify "Bytecode verifier" paragraph with [http://db.usenix.org/events/vee05/full_papers/p153-yunhe.pdf Virtual Machine Showdoxecuted VM instructions, and that the resulting register code is 25% larger than the correpsonding stack code. The increased cost of fetching more VM code due to larger code size involves only 1.07% extra real machine loads per VM instruction eliminated. On a Pentium 4 machine, the register machine required 32.3% less time to execute standard benchmarks if dispatch is performed using a C switch statement. Even if more efficient threaded dispatch is available (which requires labels as first class values), the reduction in running time is still around 26.5% for the register architecture." --mj 20:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Native java processors

A link to. --Javalenok 13:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization of "virtual machine"

I can understand that "Virtual Machine" would be capitalized where referring to the name of a particular JVM implementation, but shouldn't it be lower case, e.g. "Java virtual machine", when referring to virtual machines that run Java in general? -- intgr 09:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree--why is virtual machine capitalized in Java virtual machine? As far as I know it is not a trademark or the like. I move for changing the name to "Java virtual machine" (since there is a redirect there this will need an expedient deletion for move). 192.102.209.29 (talk) 23:14, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:20, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

---

Java Virtual Machine → Java virtual machine – Fix capitalization to match article body usage. --Cybercobra (talk) 07:04, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

• Support as uncontroversial. – Pnm (talk) 22:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Perhaps optimistically

The phrase "perhaps optimistically", referring to the statement "We intend that this specification should sufficiently document the Java Virtual Machine to make possible compatible clean-room implementations." was deleted by Intqr as "clearly POV". As someone who HAS participated in the design/construction of a (not quite cleanroom) independent implementation of Java I can tell you that I was being polite -- the statement is an outright lie.

Would Intqr like to propose different wording? drh 02:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It is not a "lie," it reflects the intent of the specification. If you could cite a source and add an additional comment about its incompleteness then that would be great. Stating that it is "optimistic" is a judgment, e.g., a point of view, and not a very informative one at that. -- intgr 19:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

You can count on one hand the independent implementations of Java, and most are considered proprietary enough that not much detail is published about them. Therefore there's not much in the way of references to use. My name is on one publication about the Java implementation I've participated in, but that's ten years old, and didn't delve into this issue.

But my point is that that quotation from the Java spec is, without further qualification, very misleading. No one can build an independent "cleanroom" implementation of Java without significant reverse engineering of Sun's test suite. In many cases the test suite is in direct contradiction of the specification, and the test suite always wins if you want to be "certified". drh 23:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Dubious

The JVM is distributed along with a set of standard class libraries which implement the Java API (Application Programming Interface). The virtual machine and API have to be consistent with each other and are therefore bundled together as the Java Runtime Environment.

Why does the API has to be consistent with the virtual machine ? In principle the API should be completely independent from the virtual machine (that is, the API A should work with either JVM J or JVM K). --hdante (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

There are certain features of the API, such as weak references and class loading capabilities, that require extra support from the JVM. The interfaces for providing such support are not defined by any specifications, so the JVM and API are interdependent in these areas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.83.181 (talk) 22:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The jre is tied to the specific jvm implementation. The examples I give are specific to sun's vm but I believe it is the most popular and therefore the most relevant context with which to discuss this.

There are many hooks into the core of the vm. See the sun.misc.Unsafe class. Many graphics operations are optimized through accessing blocks of memory allocated with this class. It is also how reflection is implemented both through native accessors and loading class code that purposely br For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --23:33, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Java

Hi I want complete information regarding java compiler —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.242.7.207 (talk) 07:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

how many instructions does JVM has ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.183.67.150 (talk) 13:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Opening heading

"Compare javaw" -> what the hell? This sentence makes no sentence, you have to read the linked article to understand what the author means. And it is not relevant to the topic. Delete this sentence (it is confusing) or elaborate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.2.240.180 (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)