D vs Java

[Anders F Björklund]

Georg Wrede wrote:

> 12k would be my dream for D! Seriously.

9-10k is overhead of the Mach-O format, so that's as low as it gets...

It's possible to make C++ and D programs of an equivalent size too, by
making their standard runtime libraries dynamically linked instead of 
statically linked like in the list I posted. (as those libs are *big*)

Of course, then you also need to make sure that the receiving end of 
those programs have the correct version of runtime library installed, 
something that is a Huge Pain for distributing C++ programs on Linux...

But Bjarne doesn't have to worry about those small practical things,
(see http://public.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Hello-world)
and having Phobos statically linked might prove to be a Good Thing ?

So until D is much more stable, I think Phobos should be kept static.

> I think we'll get a lot smaller executables once 1.0 has been out for 
> some time and we get down to the basic, mundane stuff in development. Or 
> Walter does. :-)

This was with GDC, you could probably make smaller programs with DMD ?

> The 5 years I taught CS made me a firm believer in how immensely 
> important the choice of the first language to teach really is. The 
> things in that language stick with you for the rest of your life, no 
> matter how many others you learn after it.

My first programming language ever was HyperTalk, believe it or not.

--anders