To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
viton,
"I didn't made such a performance claims. I'm talking about good enough performance. Even if it is just 50%."
I've repeatedly said that efficiency is important to me, why do you think I'm so fixated on the optimiser? It's not just for the sake of complexity.
"As I said, Intel engineers did ARM binary translation without any 'magic buzz' about it. It just works."
Are you talking about running ARM/Android software on atoms?
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365/intels-medfield-atom-z2460-arriv...
That's um, the opposite.
This following link however is closer to what I am talking about:
http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/10/russian-hackers-arm/
"Elbrus Technology’s secret sauce is its binary translator with multiple layers of hand-tuned optimization."
They are getting 40% efficiency btw. Hopefully that will convince you that highly efficient translation is difficult and needs a target optimizer. If you still don't want to admit that, well what can I say, we'll just have to disagree.
I'm not trying to stop you =)
"the best is the enemy of the good"
I'm still very skeptical about the overall experience but we'll have to wait and see for ourselves.
Phones are around for significant period of time. Compatibility and performance are good enough.
I mentioned Eltech in my second post.
Edited 2013-01-12 13:03 UTC





Member since:
2005-08-09
The goal, to my understanding, is to execute legacy programs with competitive performance, not a Guinness records for the sake of it.
I didn't made such a performance claims. I'm talking about good enough performance. Even if it is just 50%.
As I said, Intel engineers did ARM binary translation without any "magic buzz" about it. It just works.