Hi !
Featured games (91)
games approved by the League of Dukes
Games in Showcase (757)
Games in Android Showcase (229)
games submitted by our members
Games in WIP (844)
games currently in development
News: Read the Java Gaming Resources, or peek at the official Java tutorials
    Home     Help   Search   Login   Register   
Pages: [1]
  ignore  |  Print  
  Performance in 1.1  (Read 2455 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Offline JoeyTR

Innocent Bystander

Java games rock!

« Posted 2003-01-11 11:10:53 »

Greetings fellow Java programmers! Although I have been writting Java games for more than a couple of years (and being a games programmer since the glorious days of Commodore 64), I never knew about this site until a month ago! I have gathered a number of performance questions and I'm really glad that this forum exists, so I can hopefully exchange opinions with some of you.

OK I have a number of questions that lie in the field of 'Black Art', so if you are an experienced Java programmer your input will be highly appriciated. Before I start, I should let you know that I am exclusively creating Java applets using 1.1 and my primary interest is the behaviour of the MS VM. So please, all you gurus out there limit your answers to these parameters.

Here we go:
1. Would the Java compiler one uses, affect the quality or the performance of the compiled project? To be more specific, if you're targeting for Java 1.1 and you use the latest Java compiler, is this good, bad or doesn't matter? If you are primarily targeting for MS VM would it be better to use (sigh!) Visual J++?

2. Obfuscation: Apart from any moral point of view, would it ever affect the performance? Do you know any obfuscators that work better than others?

3. The -O parameter. I never see anyone use this parameter, so I have to ask: if a program is already optimized, would the use of the -O, mess things up?

4. There was a time when the site had posted a number of brilliant Java routines. Now they have completely removed the developer's section. Has any of you kept these articles?

5. Finally an Image question that is not directly related to performance, but deals with something that could potentially cause trouble in execution. Negative Coordinates: What happens when you use drawImage() on negative coordinates? Could this ever cause memory corruption?

That's all! I'd like to thank you all for reading this, and please feel free to add your comments.
Offline Orangy Tang

JGO Kernel

Medals: 57
Projects: 11

Monkey for a head

« Reply #1 - Posted 2003-01-11 11:46:04 »

1. Compiler choice usually has a minimal effect - VM used is usually much more influential.

2. Never tried it myself. Rumoured to provide a speedup, but not sure how much..

3. As far as I know, the optimise -O parameter has never actually done anything..

4. Perhaps the <a href="">way back machine</a> could help you? A quick look shows the dev section seems to be avalible...

5. Negative/invalid coords should be perfectly fine, pixels should be clipped to the target properly automagically.

[ - Play Growth Spurt, Rescue Squad and Snowman Village ] [ Rebirth - game resource library ]
Offline Abuse

JGO Ninja

Medals: 66

falling into the abyss of reality

« Reply #2 - Posted 2003-01-16 19:59:18 »

1. if you are compiling for 1.1, using javac 1.3+, you will need to use the compiler flag "-target 1.1" to make it generate class files compatible with <1.1.

2. Obfuscation reduces class file size considerably, speed wise though, they tend to make little difference.
(Having said that, most obfuscators also perform optimisations to your code as well, so you may get some benefit)
Games published by our own members! Check 'em out!
Legends of Yore - The Casual Retro Roguelike
Offline erikd

JGO Ninja

Medals: 16
Projects: 4
Exp: 14 years


« Reply #3 - Posted 2003-01-20 09:59:37 »

As far as I know, the optimise -O parameter has never actually done anything..

Well, it made your classes really big  Grin
(but not any faster)

From what I heard is that -O was omitted because it worked counter effective for JIT optimizations (where the real optimization is).


Offline Mamoulian

Senior Newbie

« Reply #4 - Posted 2003-01-21 06:44:09 »

I am currently in a project that has to use JDK 1.1.8.

Compiler doesn't seem to make a difference, but JDK matters: We tried SUN 1.1.8 and IBM 1.1.8. IBM's JDK seems to be faster in casting operations and overloading.

In UI things ther was nearly no difference.

As obfuscator, we tried jode which removes all debug code, encodes field names, etc. There was a slightly performance boost, but we just noriced it in a loop with more as 100.000 runs and numerous casting operations. Even then the boost was below 2%  :-/

And -O parameter: Haven't noticed any performance difference.
Pages: [1]
  ignore  |  Print  

EgonOlsen (78 views)
2018-06-10 19:43:48

EgonOlsen (58 views)
2018-06-10 19:43:44

EgonOlsen (78 views)
2018-06-10 19:43:20

DesertCoockie (260 views)
2018-05-13 18:23:11

nelsongames (158 views)
2018-04-24 18:15:36

nelsongames (157 views)
2018-04-24 18:14:32

ivj94 (899 views)
2018-03-24 14:47:39

ivj94 (162 views)
2018-03-24 14:46:31

ivj94 (812 views)
2018-03-24 14:43:53

Solater (175 views)
2018-03-17 05:04:08
Java Gaming Resources
by philfrei
2017-12-05 19:38:37

Java Gaming Resources
by philfrei
2017-12-05 19:37:39

Java Gaming Resources
by philfrei
2017-12-05 19:36:10

Java Gaming Resources
by philfrei
2017-12-05 19:33:10

List of Learning Resources
by elect
2017-03-13 14:05:44

List of Learning Resources
by elect
2017-03-13 14:04:45

SF/X Libraries
by philfrei
2017-03-02 08:45:19

SF/X Libraries
by philfrei
2017-03-02 08:44:05 is not responsible for the content posted by its members, including references to external websites, and other references that may or may not have a relation with our primarily gaming and game production oriented community. inquiries and complaints can be sent via email to the info‑account of the company managing the website of java‑
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Managed by Enhanced Four Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!