Hi, I think its very easy to dismiss a language or technology *from afar*, without actually ever trying it. I know I have.
My point about Groovy was, give it a go, the initial ramp up is way lower than say Scala as it integrates so well with Java. Would I have chosen to stray from Java on my own? Probably not, but I am now glad I did. All languages will have something on paper that doesn't do it for you, Java has loads for example. But hey, we use it and still get the job done. This private access situation hasn't been an issue in practice. Why? Because I know the field exits either via the IDE (and that tells me its private) or by looking at the source code (which also says its private). So if I go ahead and use, its because I ignored the signposts. On 31 July 2012 19:37, Ricky Clarkson <ricky.clark...@gmail.com> wrote: > Back to the Groovy topic, I just found out from a Haskell guy forced into > Groovy that it doesn't respect private. I verified this in the bugtracker > but saw conflicting ideas about whether it'll be fixed in the upcoming 2.0 > or the more distant 3.0. > > He had some lovely things to say about the language. I must look up > 'trainwreck' as applied to programming languages. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "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. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "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.
