On 03/08/2012 01:08 AM, foobar wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 21:39:39 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 03/07/2012 09:04 PM, foobar wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 March 2012 at 10:08:53 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 03/06/2012 10:30 PM, deadalnix wrote:
auto helps too.
This remark was explicitly about _Java_ code style.
Wrong. This is an issue with the *language*, NOT the naming convention.
It is hard to imagine how it could be concluded that this is not what
the post has expressed.
Come on, do we really need to discuss the difference between a
programming language and its coding conventions?
The fact that Java has flaws *as a language* is completely orthogonal to
the fact that it has an excellent coding convention which can also be
used with other languages such as D.
One of the reasons for Java's success is its code style despite being a
simplistic language. It might be painful to write "duration" instead of
"dur" when working on your own pet project but it's in a different story
when dealing with large enterprise systems. IMO D will not catch on in a
larger setting (in the enterprise) as long as it refuses to grow up and
keeps it advocating its 1337 hacker attitude.
To make this clear, we agree on the relevant issues. There obviously has
been a misunderstanding, and it does not make sense to argue about it.
