D vs Java

[pragma]

In article <dvr64c$6sv$1 at digitaldaemon.com>, kris says...
>
>Kyle Furlong wrote:
>> kris wrote:
>> 
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>>> "kris" <foo at bar.com> wrote in message news:4420779B.6020604 at bar.com...
>>>>
>>>>> It would be more interesting if this were entitled D vs C++. After 
>>>>> all, isn't that (as Mattias indicated) the target "competition" ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We've already had those threads in spades <g>. 
>>>
>>>
>>> True <g>
>>>
>>> Did anyone mention DDL? Given that it would make D the only compiled 
>>> language I've heard of with a runtime link-loader, that would seem to 
>>> have some bearing?
>> 
>> 
>> Just what I was thinking. Can DDL make compile once, run everywhere 
>> possible? (assuming that is an idiom we would like to support)
>
>No, DDL does no such thing. Nor is it intended to (instead, it's 
>deliberately machine-architecture specific).
>
>Functionality exposed by DDL is roughly the equivalent of a Java 
>class-loader, but for pre-optimized native object-code exposing a D 
>callable interface. This is a highly unusual attribute for native code 
>runtime, and is (in my opinion) one of the most important assets for the 
>D language. DDL also has the potential to support full reflection.

I couldn't have said it better myself. :)

A pleasant side-effect from all this is that it may help increase code-mobility
across the windows/linux/mac divide, for any dynamic D binaries (x86 object
files that comply with the D ABI) that are free from OS-specific code.
Provided, that's just theory for now, but it should be possible.  While that's
not "run-everywhere", it gets you far enough to make certain styles of plugin
architectures very possible.

- EricAnderton at yahoo