Java > Scala

Walter Bright newshound2 at
Sat Dec 3 12:33:11 PST 2011

On 12/3/2011 11:28 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I think that what it comes down to is that Java used to be a lot slower than
> it is now but is now plenty fast for a lot of stuff, and that original
> reputation for slowness has stuck on some level. In some cases, Java will be
> as fast as C. In many cases it will not. But it really isn't particularly slow
> for a lot of what it's used for. So, it really does have an unfair rap at this
> point for being slow. It really isn't. However, it will never match C for
> speed such that anyone looking to get every ounce of speed from their CPU is
> going to find it acceptable.

Java is as fast as C (excluding the slow Java startup time) when the C code is 
written as Java code (i.e. using types equivalent to Java types, pointers to 
structs, everything on the heap, etc.).

It's when you take advantage of things C has to offer, like user defined value 
types, pointers, etc., that C pulls way ahead.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list