| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
JRE seems mandatory??
JRE seems mandatory??
Posted Mar 27, 2008 15:08 UTC (Thu) by tetromino (subscriber, #33846)In reply to: JRE seems mandatory?? by pr1268
Parent article: OpenOffice.org 2.4 released
A significant portion of OOo is written in Java. Most of the import/export filters, for example.
(Log in to post comments)
JRE seems mandatory??
Posted Mar 27, 2008 15:47 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link]
But why isn't it compiled to the native code by default? It's not like the filters are meant to be copied to other platforms.
JRE seems mandatory??
Posted Mar 27, 2008 17:03 UTC (Thu) by renox (guest, #23785) [Link]
>But why isn't it compiled to the native code by default? It's not like the filters are meant to be copied to other platforms. Perhaps a performance issue? Compiled Java isn't necessarily faster than a JVM, probably because much more manpower has been invested in the JVM than in a 'normal ahead-of-time' compiler. Plus from a marketing point of view, I doubt that Sun would like this..
JRE seems mandatory??
Posted Mar 27, 2008 17:07 UTC (Thu) by elanthis (subscriber, #6227) [Link]
You still need the JRE even if compiled to "native" code. Just like C needs libc, C++ needs libstdc++, and so on, Java needs many of the components of the JRE even when compiled. It needs the bytecode interpreter even since there are cases where you cannot compile code natively, or when you want to load a plugin that is distributed only as bytecode, and so on.