[Mono-list] Please comment on excellent Java/J2EE/EJB v. Mono/.NET article here...

[Fergus Henderson]

On 01-Nov-2001, Chris Seberino <seberino@spawar.navy.mil> wrote:
> [Jason Watkins wrote:]
> > 2.) Java is not appropriate for all tasks. Neither is .net for that matter.
> > But what we do need is a loosely coupled platform where different language
> > technology's are allowed to interact as much as possible. .net doesn't
> > wholely solve that problem, but it definately steps in the right way. We
> > should not throw that baby out with the Passport bathwater.
> 
> I'm not an expert but I believe there *already* exists compilers
> that compile lots of languages to the Java Virtual Machine.

That's true, but the .NET CLR has better support for running non-Java-like
languages.  In particular, it has features such as

	- byref parameters
	- value types
	- tail call instructions
	- unverifiable code (pointers, etc.)
	- function pointers

These make it a lot easier to produce efficient code when compiling
non-Java-like languages.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  | "... it seems to me that 15 years of
The University of Melbourne         | email is plenty for one lifetime."
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- Prof. Donald E. Knuth