D vs. C#

[Roberto Mariottini]

Dave wrote:
> 
> "Roberto Mariottini" <rmariottini at mail.com> wrote in message 
> news:ffi95a$1ihb$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> Making D compilable for the Java VM today would make it immediately 
>> portable to tens of platforms (and hundreds of cell phones models), 
>> today.
>>
> 
> Making a D to C translater for that might actually make more sense, 
> given the design of D and that all of the platforms would likely have a 
> C compiler available. Then all that would be missing would be ease of 
> distributing a single set of bytecode. Then again, binaries couldn't be 
> reverse engineered as easily as bytecode either.
> In any case, GDC may have quite a few of those chips covered before 
> either a D bytecode compiler or C2D was done <g>.

I know of no cell phone with a C compiler today.

> Do the standard Java GUI libraries work the same for all cell phones, or 
> in general does each cell phone vendor have their own specialized 
> library?

MIDP and CDC are strict standards to which cell phones producer adhere. 
There are some vendor extensions, but they have few success: the scope 
of Java ME programming is to make your application/game work on any cell 
phone, so is in the developer interest to strictly apply the standard.

> Walter had a great point earlier as well -- Is Java really 
> "write once, run anywhere" especially where GUI's are concerned? I 
> recall a lot of complaints where some things tended to work differently 
> depending on the VM / platform but maybe those cases are rare now-a-days.

Java is really "write once, run anywhere", I've never found a GUI 
portability problem. The problems are the programmers that don't write 
portable code (this is independent from Java: you can write non-portable 
code in any language).

Ciao