On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Ricky Clarkson <ricky.clark...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > Since Fantom doesn't even let you write generic classes, I'm guessing > > they special case their collections in the compiler. > > That really bugs me. When I began using Java I was really impressed > at what I would now call dogfooding, that it was pretty much built in > itself at least as far as the library goes, whereas I don't think that > was true for any of the BASICs I'd used beforehand. It was true of C, > C++ and Pascal which I used before Java but for some reason the > importance of it didn't really click until Java. > > To see Fantom provide built-in generic types only seems like a serious > step backwards, like not having lambdas or not having recursion. > I agree, it's a weakness, and one that Andy and Brian are resolved to address as soon as possible (and since there is some built-in generic support already present, I'm hoping the effort won't be too colossal). I think it would be an acceptable limitation in the absence of the competition (after all, we managed to get by without generics in Java for a decade), but with Scala/Gosu/Ceylon/Kotlin around, I understand if this shortcoming makes people uncomfortable. -- Cédric -- 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.
