On 07/05/2011 11:21 AM, Kevin Wright wrote:
I don't see Lombok as being significantly different from Scala here.
Both are alternative ways of emitting valid JVM bytecode that differ
from "pure" Java, and both require support at both the IDE and
compiler level. In this sense, the change required to migrate from
Java to Lombok is not significantly less than the change required to
migrate from Java to Scala, is see both as occupying a middle ground -
somewhere halfway between being just a library and being an entirely
new language.
Also in response to Casper:
1. Lombok is not a hack. It's the use of a specific language element
(annotations) and related tools (annotation processor). Annotation are
the way Java has been designed to be extended (in a constrained way).
It's still "pure" Java, as pure as the other annotations (e.g.
@Transactional, etc...) are. Clearly, the extension scope is narrower
than the use of another language (e.g. no traits, no operator
overloading, etc... (*)).
2. Exactly because the extension scope is narrow, using annotations is
much simpler than moving to Scala.
(*) I know about people using annotations and annotation processors to
implement traits in Java. This is probably pushing annotations too much.
--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
java.net/blog/fabriziogiudici - www.tidalwave.it/people
fabrizio.giud...@tidalwave.it
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java
Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to javaposse@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.
