Java > Scala

[Timon Gehr]

On 11/30/2011 09:56 PM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> Are you not being a bit simplistic here?
>
> There are several JVM implementations around not just one.
>

Where did he talk about implementations? He only described the _design_ 
of the JVM.

> Plus if I understand correctly some complains of people using D in real
> projects, in many cases JVM JITs are able to generate better code than
> D. At least for the time being.
>

Nope. (Even when interpreting 'D' as 'DMD'). Except when the D code is 
written badly.

>
>> I used to be intimately familiar with the JVM, I even wrote a gc for it.
>> The bytecode ops in it are designed for Java, nothing more. Worse, it's
>> a primitive stack machine. To generate even passably good native code,
>> the JVM has to do a lot of reverse engineering of the bytecode.
>>
>> For example, you cannot pass by value anything other than the primitive
>> Java data types. There are no pointers. Want an unsigned int? Forget it.
>> Arrays of anything but class references? Nyuk nyuk nyuk. Etc.
>>
>