GCJ vs. D

[Kyle Furlong]

David Medlock wrote:
> Jeremy wrote:
>> What do you think:
>>
>> GCJ (native Java GNU compiler project) vs. DMD?
>>
>> My thoughts:
>>
>> * DMD is still much more faster and memory efficient, but GCJ v4 is 
>> closing the
>> gap
>> * GCJ allows you to compile Java as if it was just another language, 
>> but your
>> code can still be made into bytecode (so you ideally get the best of both
>> worlds)
>> * GCJ can interface with C/C++ (CNI)
>> * DMD lets you get away from everything-is-an-object which can be nice...
>>
>> I think it is going to be harder for DMD to compete if such a strong 
>> native Java
>> compiler is making good progress...?
>>
> 
> If you were going to develop a 3D game, or a new scripting language, or 
> some other low level software D beats Java easily.
> 
> Not only that, D is superior as a language to Java, IMO.
> 
> See:
> news://news.digitalmars.com:119/dvreco$hf1$1@digitaldaemon.com
> 
> Java's templates are an absolute joke. For about 30% more typing we get 
> homogenous containers and no casting in generic methods.  Whoopee, Sun.
> They added aspects but shot down DBC.
> They still do not have any workable type inference at all.
> It took 10 years to add primitive boxing.
> 
> The only place they win is support, users knowledgeable in the platform, 
> and tools.

These three things are *NOT* trivial. They are actually essential to the success of the language.

> 
> -DavidM