[HN Gopher] PyCharm's Transition to Apple Silicon
___________________________________________________________________
PyCharm's Transition to Apple Silicon
Author : gamesbrainiac
Score : 55 points
Date : 2021-01-29 18:30 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.jetbrains.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.jetbrains.com)
| miohtama wrote:
| I did not know Jetbrains ships it own JVM. What engine they use?
| daniel-thompson wrote:
| They use a forked version of OpenJDK.
|
| See
| https://confluence.jetbrains.com/display/JBR/JetBrains+Runti...
| derivagral wrote:
| > To hear the whole story, listen to the podcast
|
| Is there a transcript somewhere?
| throwawaysea wrote:
| So here's the same podcast on YouTube:
| https://youtu.be/OgzERBIemjw
|
| If you're on a computer, click the three dots that are to the
| right of "Save" and then click "Open Transcript". These are
| auto-generated so the fidelity may not be there but it's one
| shortcut to reading the podcast.
| raymondh wrote:
| Wow, these are heroic efforts that show a tremendous dedication
| to achieving acceptable performance and rendering.
| temp667 wrote:
| Jetbrain stuff has always been slow - until I got an AMD 5600
| (ram at 3200). For whatever reason, this combo of chip and
| updates to their software maybe (I turn off a lot of the add
| ins) - I've stopped being annoyed at the speed. It's "fast
| enough".
| ed25519FUUU wrote:
| Which is a surprise to me because I don't really consider the
| jetbrain products to be "performant". They run fine, sure, but
| take a long time to start up or open a project, and can get
| sluggish if left open for awhile.
| judge2020 wrote:
| It can take long on an old system, but that doesn't matter
| much [to me] when the IDE works fast throughout the day even
| when periodically opening and closing projects.
| bulenkov wrote:
| IntelliJ start up time is much better now. Take a look on
| IntelliJ CE (ported to Apple Silicon) vs VS Code (under
| Rosetta 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erg0Dz0MXww Of
| course this is unfair comparison, but you can see that the
| start up isn't slow.
| kaszanka wrote:
| That copy of VS Code seems to be starting _very_ slowly,
| even taking the emulation into account. Lots of
| extensions, maybe?
|
| For reference, it starts in around 3 seconds on my
| 2013ish laptop. (actually, more like 2014 - Haswell i7)
| jki275 wrote:
| JetBrains IDEs are quite heavy in my experience. I like their
| capabilities (pycharms at least), but they do come at a cost.
| oxfordmale wrote:
| My MacBook Pro 2019 model is about to take off if I use both
| DataGrip and PyCharm at the same time.
| deergomoo wrote:
| To be fair, a stern glance is usually enough to get a 2019
| MacBook hot enough to cook your breakfast
| brundolf wrote:
| > To this end, we began to investigate how we could handle this
| transition with grace. It soon turned out that we had to re-write
| a lot of the JIT system, a core component of the JVM itself,
| which was something we had little to no experience in.
|
| Why couldn't they just merge the (presumable) upstream OpenJDK
| support into their fork?
| snicker7 wrote:
| tl;dr: Article has little substance and instead points reader to
| a podcast.
|
| Ugh.
| tcmb wrote:
| You would think that Java is maybe not the right tool for the
| job, if you have to write your own Runtime first.
| daniel-thompson wrote:
| They didn't write the runtime, they just modified a
| (relatively) small piece of it. From the article:
|
| > JetBrains forked the OpenJDK project in order to facilitate
| better control over how the IDEs looked on Macs a well as other
| HiDPI screens; JetBrains Runtime was born and we bundled it
| with our IDEs from 2014.
|
| > There are many facets of the runtime, and we do not know
| every little crevice of it, rather we focus on the part of the
| code that handles the rendering of UI on screens.
| [deleted]
| acdha wrote:
| Here's the problem: they selected Java many, many years ago
| back when Apple shipped Java as part of Mac OS X. I believe
| they're based on IntelliJ and presumably have added a
| considerable amount of their own code over the last 20 years.
| They certainly didn't know that the Oracle acquisition would
| lead to Apple removing a not unpopular feature due to legal
| risks.
|
| With a large cross-platform codebase like that, Java is an
| understandable choice and at any point the cost of switching
| would be greater than the cost of fixing the current issue.
| aaomidi wrote:
| This isn't it's own runtime. It's a modified JDK and when
| you're one of the largest pieces of GUI software in Java,
| you're obviously going to have things you want to change in it.
|
| They've created a huge platform. They're going to have needs
| that aren't met in a pre-packaged thing.
|
| VSCode avoided using any frontend frameworks, does that mean
| they made a wrong engineering choice?
| criddell wrote:
| Not necessarily. It could be that even though they have to
| rewrite some of the runtime it's _still_ the right tool for the
| job.
| deaddodo wrote:
| This was my main thought. Maybe all that effort expended on
| managing the runtime could be aggregated into a unified effort
| in a more cohesive (to your goals) language.
| diroussel wrote:
| IntelliJ had been based on java for twenty years. It has
| worked well as a mainstream cross platform application that
| has been around before, and outlived, other approaches.
|
| Moving to another language would surely be many more orders
| of magnitude than plugging in a new JIT?
| pjmlp wrote:
| Lets see how far they actually manage to go with
| Kotlin/Native, they seem to be trying to make Kotlin the
| new Delphi.
|
| I don't have any hopes for it besides Android, which is
| working thanks Google gatekeeping Java updates and pushing
| Kotlin instead.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-29 23:02 UTC)