News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Aren’t More Users More Happy with Our VMs? Part 1 by ltratt on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @02:27PM (#17920666)
In general, yes, you're reading the timings right, but there's a couple of factors to consider.

First, the JIT compiler has often done most of its work during the first in-process iteration, so the plots are not generally following a "one in-process iteration is slow, then the JIT kicks in from in-process iteration 2 onwards" model. Put another way, the JIT compiler is often making even the first in-process iteration run pretty fast.

Second, I would suggest that the often small timing differences are more worrying than they may first appear. In a semi-mature compiler, optimisations are frequently in the range of a 0.5-1% improvement. So if your measurements are only accurate to (say) 2%, most of your attempted optimisations will be misclassified (bad optimisations will sometimes be measured as good; good optimisations will sometimes be measured as bad). Furthermore, when a VM recompiles things, it generally performs several optimisations at once. Thus, if the overall performance gets worse (even if by a small bit), it may suggest that several optimisations performed badly at the same time.

Re:Why Aren’t More Users More Happy with Our VMs? Part 1 by Boxxed on Wednesday September 05, 2018 @04:43PM (#17921738)
But doesn't that mean the article's point is kind of moot? That when people blame slow languages / VMs, they actually are slow and it has nothing to do with warm-up time?
Re:Why Aren’t More Users More Happy with Our VMs? Part 1 by codeflo on Thursday September 06, 2018 @06:08AM (#17925101)
Both can be true, benchmarking JITs is really hard, but even so, (despite decades of claims to the contrary), managed VMs actually are a bit slower than unsafe native code.
Re:Why Aren’t More Users More Happy with Our VMs? Part 1 by wbl on Thursday September 06, 2018 @10:17AM (#17926451)
Nothing prevents native code from being safe