Massimo wrote: > "C# was designed to always be compiled, Java was not." > > Wow, you have no idea what you are talking about. You are junking up > this discussion group with nonsense. > > Maybe you should limit your posting to technologies that you've > actually tried using. > I find rather annoying this kind of reply. :-) Especially people like me, who hasn't got a deep knowledge of C#, would like to have some proofing points: "you're wrong BECAUSE ...".
The few things that I know about the topic are that Microsoft itself released an experimental native compiler for C#, named Bartok: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartok_%28compiler%29 OTOH in Java we have GCJ http://gcc.gnu.org/java/ but it's not a project from Sun. From what I remember, GCJ has always been of poor quality, while Bartok was able to compile an operating system (Singularity). Thus, it seems Microsoft has always had a deeper attitude at getting compiled, native code than Sun. Since I've professed my ignorance about C#, this basic knowledge isn't enough to proof that Josh is right - that's why I'd like to see a more objective discussion on the topic, rather than some sentence at the personal level. -- Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere." weblogs.java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/blog fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it - mobile: +39 348.150.6941 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
