On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:12:59 +0000 Russel Winder <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-02-24 at 15:49 +0400, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: > […] > > You missed the point that these have to be the *real* integer > > constants starting from 0. No frigging magic classes please. > > I am not sure why they have to be hardware integers, this is a > JVM-based system and hardware integers do not exist. I feel a > contradiction between requirements and technology here! > JVM runs on hardware therefore hardware integers clearly do exist whether JVM chooses to expose them or block them. > Safe Enum pattern/idiom is indeed all about the representation of the > symbols being instances of a class. But small immutable objects are > very cheap these days on the JVM. > As cheap as a real native primitive? > It is possible Java 9 or Java 10 will remove the primitive types > completely so that all variables are reference types leaving it to the > JVM to handle all boxing and unboxing internally thus making things a > lot more efficient and faster. How could that possibly be *more* efficient and faster? > > Go has eschewed all dynamic linking and is making this a feature. But > it has a mechanism for being able to call C from libraries. Python > has a mechanism for calling C from shared libraries. D is at a > disadvantage. > D is also able to call C. And it doesn't pretend that missing dynamic lib support is a "feature". D is certainly not at any disadvantage here. > > Go has managed to attract volunteer labour to write in Go new versions > of everything previously written in C other than actual OSs. But even > there people are beginning to write OSs in Go. > FWIW, People have already written OS in D.
