|
Members in Shoutbox
None.
Shoutbox Search
Shoutbox Commands
/w [name] > Whisper
/r > Reply to last whisper /me > Marks as action Shoutbox Information
Moderators may delete any and all shouts at will.
|
Global Shoutbox
Please log in to shout.
[2016-12-05. : 3:28 am]  jjf28 -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: If you can't feed that bytecode as-is to the hardware, then you require a compiler in the case of direct interpretation there is no process of creating machine code that did not previously exist, to be fed to the hardware. The entire JVM is written, no new code is generated, the register values are different and existing routines are invoked in new and interesting ways[2016-12-05. : 3:27 am] CecilSunkure -- lil-Infernolil-Inferno shouted: CecilSunkure w/e, getting fatter $tacc$ than you so who cares doubt it.[2016-12-05. : 3:27 am] lil-Inferno -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: so i guess if u just write basic bitch code it doesn't matter if u use java w/e, getting fatter $tacc$ than you so who cares[2016-12-05. : 3:26 am]  Moose -- Cecil, how much catv you read and how much Plan9 you running on your machine LMAO[2016-12-05. : 3:22 am] CecilSunkure -- They prance around believing in fantasies of free tradeoffs and infinite machine power[2016-12-05. : 3:21 am] CecilSunkure -- Well you didn't admit you were wrong, so I'm still on the topic of you didn't know what a compiler was[2016-12-05. : 3:20 am] CecilSunkure -- Not in the context of defining a compiler, and not being free[2016-12-05. : 3:20 am] jjf28 -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: Doesn't matter how tiny or clever those performance hits are uhh, yeah, it does xD[2016-12-05. : 3:18 am] jjf28 -- the first time any given method runs; it's really not a big deal, memory management gets pretty icky tho[2016-12-05. : 3:17 am] CecilSunkure -- Therefor, any language that uses a compiler will take a performance hit.[2016-12-05. : 3:16 am] CecilSunkure -- If you can't feed that bytecode as-is to the hardware, then you require a compiler[2016-12-05. : 3:16 am] jjf28 -- it's not turning the code into statements used by the processor, the statements the processor uses are already written[2016-12-05. : 3:16 am] CecilSunkure -- When we read bytecode, what happens? Eventually, DOESN'T MATTER HOW, it is translated into machine code, because modern processors require machine code to do shit[2016-12-05. : 3:15 am] CecilSunkure -- "A compiler is a special program that processes statements written in a particular programming language and turns them into machine language or "code" that a computer's processor uses."[2016-12-05. : 3:14 am] jjf28 -- they're not compiling the assembly into machine code that runs on the processor, they're running the code on the simulation program[2016-12-05. : 3:13 am] jjf28 -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: Interpreter running bytecode is still interpretation. It's a compiler. no, it's not turning it into machine code, it's processing the bytecode manually -- a whole layer of abstraction[2016-12-05. : 3:12 am] CecilSunkure -- The only way it wouldn't be a compiler is if there's no performance hit because it's just machine code[2016-12-05. : 3:12 am] CecilSunkure -- Interpreter running bytecode is still interpretation. It's a compiler.[2016-12-05. : 3:12 am] jjf28 -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: That's 1 case, and quite a fantasy at that they're real[2016-12-05. : 3:11 am] jjf28 -- they do have those, also the interpreter can straight up run the bytecode[2016-12-05. : 3:10 am] jjf28 -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: jjf28 Bytecode still needs to be compiled. All bytecode does is remove heftier front-end parsing. It's still interpreted. JIT is pretty cool, but at that point really why not use C? Interpretation for cross platform is silly, when interpretation can be much more powerful for fast iteration time... Cross-platform at the cost of performance? Really? I'd argue a good C programmer can shit out features faster than any Java goon, and have it still be cross-platform, without any performance hits. I just told you the cases where it doesn't need to be compiled  [2016-12-05. : 3:09 am] CecilSunkure -- It's like where is the tradeoff? Should we just require good C programmers? Or should we take a performance hit and higher lesser goons...[2016-12-05. : 3:08 am] CecilSunkure -- jjf28jjf28 shouted: CecilSunkure jjf28 CecilSunkure an interpreter could just run the byte code itself, or the hardware could have a built in byte-code processor, or ofc, JIT compilation could be used - the exact behavior is platform dependent but even if it's JIT compilation there's a big difference from C-style compilation Bytecode still needs to be compiled. All bytecode does is remove heftier front-end parsing. It's still interpreted. JIT is pretty cool, but at that point really why not use C? Interpretation for cross platform is silly, when interpretation can be much more powerful for fast iteration time... Cross-platform at the cost of performance? Really? I'd argue a good C programmer can shit out features faster than any Java goon, and have it still be cross-platform, without any performance hits.[2016-12-05. : 3:06 am] Moose -- Because embedded systems. Like, nobody putting the JVM on your microwave. Yet. X^D[2016-12-05. : 3:05 am] jjf28 -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: Compiling = interpreting a JAR file. fyi jjf28jjf28 shouted: not really CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: What do you mean not really. That's exactly what interpreting is -- runtime compilation an interpreter could just run the byte code itself, or the hardware could have a built in byte-code processor, or ofc, JIT compilation could be used - the exact behavior is platform dependent but even if it's JIT compilation there's a big difference from C-style compilation[2016-12-05. : 3:05 am]  Dem0n -- I guess literally all android phones are unusable pieces of shit X^ D[2016-12-05. : 3:04 am] CecilSunkure -- so i guess if u just write basic bitch code it doesn't matter if u use java[2016-12-05. : 3:03 am] CecilSunkure -- Dem0nDem0n shouted: CecilSunkure why do people act like we still use computers with like 64 mbs ram and shit. like this matters LMAO It only does for certain pieces of code[2016-12-05. : 3:03 am] Dem0n -- CecilSunkureCecilSunkure shouted: So Java: compile your program every time it's run! why do people act like we still use computers with like 64 mbs ram and shit. like this matters LMAO[2016-12-05. : 3:03 am] CecilSunkure -- I'm now more interested in watching this guy write than explain FT LMAO[2016-12-05. : 3:01 am] Moose -- https://www.nayuki.io/page/free-small-fft-in-multiple-languages oh ya, this was part of what I ended up using[2016-12-05. : 3:00 am] CecilSunkure -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JnayXHhjlg -- beautiful AF hand writing[2016-12-05. : 2:58 am] Moose -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_Fourier_transform ya, the ones from here[2016-12-05. : 2:57 am] CecilSunkure -- So there's multiple flavors of algorithms to apply FFT? Cooley-Tukey made one, and you mentioned another?[2016-12-05. : 2:56 am] Moose -- The DFT isn't too bad to understand the computation of, but for the amount of depth I went into understanding, anything more advanced than the Cooley-Tukey FFT algorithm does magical bullshit that just works LMAO[2016-12-05. : 2:53 am] Moose -- FFT approximates a function (the signal) as a sum of sin/cos at different frequencies |
Members Online: Moose, O)FaRTy1billion[MM]
Moose, O)FaRTy1billion[MM]