GCJ vs. D

[David Medlock]

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.

-DavidM