On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 10:03 +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Is the performance that critical for a verification tool? The Hotspot > JIT is rather good nowadays, are you sure using GCJ will significantly > improve the performances? This looks a bit like premature optimization > to me, but feel free to experiment. Well, Java Pathfinder is a model checker, meaning it explores all/as-many-as-possible execution paths in a program. Given that the number of paths can easily grow out of hand, I believe every bit of speed or memory consumption improvement counts, hence I suggested compiling JPF to native code under the assumption this helps with the performance. I don't have numbers myself, but if and when I learn how to package JPF both as a gcj-package and as a regular Java program, I can do some benchmarking. According to the Debian policy for Java [1], "[p]ackages must not ship gcj-code without the permission of the Java team (<debian-java@lists.debian.org>)." What would it take to get the permission from the team to have JPF packaged as a gcj-package? I have no experience with packaging Java, but I do have experience with creating a package with Debhelper for a C++ tool. Any pointers to examples for gcj-packaging JPF would be greatly appreciated. Cheers, Marko [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/java-policy/x155.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part