What is the difference between javac and the Eclipse compiler?

Is Eclipse's Java compiler just a wrapper around the same core that the javac program is wrapped around, or is it a separate compiler altogether? If the latter, why would they reinvent the wheel?

Eclipse has implemented its own compiler called as Eclipse Compiler for Java (ECJ).

It is different from the javac, the compiler that is shipped with Sun JDK. One notable difference is that the Eclipse compiler lets you run code that didn't actually properly compile. If the block of code with the error is never ran, your program will run fine. Otherwise, it will throw an exception indicating that you tried to run code that doesn't compile.

Another difference is that the Eclipse compiler allows for incremental builds from within the Eclipse IDE, that is, all code is compiled as soon as you finish typing.

The fact that Eclipse comes with its own compiler is also apparent because you can write, compile, and run Java code in Eclipse without even installing the Java SDK.

A few examples where ECJ is preferred over javac is:

• Apache Tomcat uses ECJ to compile JSPs,
• IntelliJ IDEA has support for ECJ, as of GNU Compiler for Java (GCJ) 4.3,
• GCJ integrates with ECJ,
• Liferay builds with ECJ.

Everyone has already explained that they're different. Here are some difference in behaviors I've noticed between the two compilers. They all boil down to a bug in (at least) one of the implementations.

Compile-time optimization related

• Eclipse bug? Switching on a null with only default case

Generics type inferrence related

• Generics compiles and runs in Eclipse, but doesn’t compile in javac
• Compilers behave differently with a null parameter of a generic method

Eclipse's built-in compiler is based on IBM's Jikes java compiler. (Note that Eclipse also started its life at IBM). It is completely independent of Sun's Java compiler in the JDK; it is not a wrapper around Sun's javac.

Jikes has existed for a long time, it used to be a lot faster than the standard JDK Java compiler (but I don't know if that's still true). As to why IBM wanted to write their own Java compiler: maybe because of licensing reasons (they also have their own Java implementation).

It is a separate compiler altogether. This is needed as javac doesn't allow compilation of slightly broken code, from the eclipse site

> An incremental Java compiler. Implemented as an Eclipse builder, it is based on technology evolved from VisualAge for Java compiler. In particular, it allows to run and debug code which still contains unresolved errors.