Zitat von Michael Schnell <mschnell@lumino.de>:

>
> > If this was true, Java would have taken that market already. There is
> > nothing new to that aspect of CIL, and specially with only one minor vendor
> > supporting it.
> >
> Basically you are right, but
>  - In fact Java is very widely in use (even though there are lots of
> shortcomings regarding Java <e.g. performance> )

Which is mostly due to the garbage collector. There are already java
coprocessors boosting java to native speed.


>  - AFAIK, CIL seems to improve some of the Java shortcomings

I'm curious. Has someone evidence for that?


>  - CIL defines concepts for multi-treading and multi-processing
>  - every year the processing performance and available memory resources
> improve and thus creating "economical" object code is less critical

Same for java.
I have some doubts about the increases of processing performance. The speed ups
of the last years were mainly due to multiple cores. The increase of speed of a
single core decreased. In fact many recent computers like the eeepc are pretty
slow to get longer run times. And writing multithreaded code is economically
more expensive than single threaded. So I see a strong need for native
compilers like FPC.


>  - While (AFAIK) there are no (or only very few and rarely used)
> languages besides Java that can create byte code for the just-in-time
> compiling Java Framework, There are a lot languages with compilers form
> different brands usable with CIL (several C# compilers, C++, Pascal,
> (Oxygen and Delphi), Visual Basic, Iron-Python, .., <is there a
> Java->CIL compiler ?> )

Yes, but I didn't test it.


Mattias


