[Mono-list] mono performance, 20x differential with Java (what am i doing wrong)

Alan McGovern alan.mcgovern at gmail.com
Sat Jan 30 20:00:01 EST 2010


On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 11:08 PM, James Mansion <
james at mansionfamily.plus.com> wrote:

> Alan McGovern wrote:
>> Feel free to contribute the changes required to remove the limitations on
>> when/where mono performs TCO. That would allow you to contribute F# patches
>> if you wish.
> I'm intrigued - why say that?  I mean - what's the point?  What are you
> trying to achieve, really?

I say it because he expressed an interest in contributing to mono in the
email I responded to. He is also, by his own word, quite familiar with VM
technology in general so he'd be an ideal candidate to contribute a patch if
he wished to and had the time to do so. He also appears to be quite familiar
with TCO so he'd know all the cases which would need to be deault with.
There is no ulterior motive here.


> If someone has domain knowledge and implementation skills on top of CLR but
> can show that Mono is defective, its efinitely reasonable to ask them to
> give 'the mono development community' a test case and bug report.
> But expecting them to climb the mountain of learning to fiddle with a
> particular CLR implementation's core is nuts, particularly when they have an
> alternate that works for them to do their day job. If someone wanted to
> climb that mountain and make the changes, then presumably they would want to
> start by reading the copious up to date detailed design documentation and
> implementation notes on how (and why) it works now,  so that they could size
> the task.  Oh wait ... :-(
> Its much, much more efficient for someone who already groks the internals
> to make fiddly low-level changes, particularly if getting them into the
> release stream requires a lot of trust relationship with the release
> masters. I think you do a huge disservice to everyone by trying to get
> outsiders to work on something like that - or perhaps you just want people
> with bad news to go away so you can paper over the cracks?
> Please, ask for test cases and reports.  FWIW I suspect (justa hunch, I'm
> certainly not an expert) from what's been said that if a calling convention
> change is needed (and I seem to remember there are some issues that prevent
> fuller use of LLVM that one might also want to consider if that sort of
> change is on the cards) then its as much a political and
> major-version-compatibility issue as it is technical, and once again asking
> someone to work on patches in such a situation is laughable, given the
> degree of risk that they might completely waste their time.
> James
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-list/attachments/20100131/2b4b0dd7/attachment.html 

More information about the Mono-list mailing list