On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 11:40, Blanford <euroscript...@gmail.com> wrote: > There seems to be a Scala movement gaining steam on this site.
Too much for my favor... > I hate to break it to you all, but Scala will be going absolutely > nowhere!! ...but this is maybe to harsh. > There are many reasons for this: > 1. Scala solves no practical business problem. There already have been threads about the practical use of Scala and my impression is, that there are use cases. > 2. Scala is not easier than the alternatives. Indeed, I think it is not easier to learn and either more complicated to read than Java IMHO. On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:11, Mario Fusco <mario.fu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 1. Scala solves no practical business problem. > If this is the only reason to look for a different language I think we > will develop only in Java till the retirement. What would be the problem with that? While it is interesting in the beginning to see different paradigms in different languages when you already learned some it gets just annoying. At least I find it annoying - the need to do a lot of things from the beginning all ~10 years at least. >> 2. Scala is not easier than the alternatives. > I never said Scala is easier. Exactly the opposite actually. It is far > more complex, but for the same reason is more powerful and less > verbose. With modern IDEs verbosity is not such an issue and BTW: I would never ever thought C(++) being too verbose and Java is very C-like. I would rather say you have more options to do the same thing which I do not necessarily consider to be more powerful... >> Want to escape from Java? Your options will be dynamic type (ala >> groovy, jython). > Following your way of reasoning: which practical business problems do > dynamic languages solve? > Personally I don't like dynamic languages for the following reasons: [...] Agree: I also prefer static languages for basically your reaons. My 2 cents: The real better language that I would prefer over Java ist yet to be invented. And further still too many focus on secondary elements (I have discussed that in an earlier thread already). ...and I wonder why I am again in a thread of the kind (discussion about programming languages) I already decided to ignore for the next 5 years... - maybe because of the provocating title... -- Martin Wildam http://www.google.com/profiles/mwildam -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
