Yes, you're right, I should have mentioned market push. It's rather likely
(to me, anyway) that java gained quite a bit of traction due to Sun's
cheerleading of it, along with the uptake by i.e. IBM relatively early on.
Google adopts or makes a new programming language to replace java for
andro
Yes, you're right, I should have mentioned market push. It's rather likely
(to me, anyway) that java gained quite a bit of traction due to Sun's
cheerleading of it, along with the uptake by i.e. IBM relatively early on.
Google adopts or makes a new programming language to replace java for
andro
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
> Read The post you're referring to. I never claimed this list was exhaustive,
> it was just meant as an example of the kinds of features that I expect the
> real java.next must have in order to gain enough appeal.
Right, and I'm claimin
I think the best bit of the whole article is:
"If it's some desperate cry for attention by somebody, I just wish those
people would release their own sex tapes or something, rather than drag the
Linux kernel into their sordid world," Torvalds concluded.
--
You received this message because you
Read The post you're referring to. I never claimed this list was exhaustive,
it was just meant as an example of the kinds of features that I expect the
real java.next must have in order to gain enough appeal.
On Tuesday, March 22, 2011 3:00:29 PM UTC+1, Josh Berry wrote:
>
> I think you're kiddi
On 22 Mar 2011 22:01, "Cédric Beust ♔" wrote:
>
>
>
> 2011/3/22 Ricky Clarkson
>>
>> Let me rephrase part of that exchange for a subject probably none of us
is emotional about:
>>
>> "Repeated case studies have shown time and time again that driving on
the left is safer"
>>
>> "The fact that th
On 22 Mar 2011 21:37, "Ricky Clarkson" wrote:
>
> Let me rephrase part of that exchange for a subject probably none of us is
emotional about:
>
> "Repeated case studies have shown time and time again that driving on
the left is safer"
>
It's true!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-_and_left-ha
2011/3/22 Ricky Clarkson
> Let me rephrase part of that exchange for a subject probably none of us is
> emotional about:
>
> "Repeated case studies have shown time and time again that driving on the
> left is safer"
>
> "The fact that there are millions of cars driving on the right is enough to
Let me rephrase part of that exchange for a subject probably none of us is
emotional about:
"Repeated case studies have shown time and time again that driving on the
left is safer"
"The fact that there are millions of cars driving on the right is enough to
prove this claim completely wrong"
Is
I've seen some very impressive messes too. What's the phrase? Ah yes:
You can program FORTRAN in any language.
I've seen some superb VB/Java/Scala/C code, and some completely crap
VB/Java/Scala/C.
The quality of code is usually nothing to do with the language, but with
the quality of the p
I don't see the big deal. I've seen all sorts of code that I wonder how
people ever got it to work. Some messes are actually impressive in that
way.
His point was that the power of the language is not the problem, it's the
coding practices. The notion that Java being a very constrained language
2011/3/22 Kevin Wright
>
> With "weak" developers being those who are set in their ways, and don't
> change tactics even though they can see they're experiencing problems.
>
> If you were to interpret that statement as "*I would have given up [on the
> overall project]*", then we're in complete a
2011/3/22 Cédric Beust ♔
>
>
> 2011/3/22 Kevin Wright
>
>> I'll leave you with a great snippet from Glen Vanderberg:
http://www.vanderburg.org/blog/Software/Development/sharp_and_blunt.rdoc
>>>
>>>
>>> That's a horrifyingly condescending quote making fun of people who
>>> actually ship sof
2011/3/22 Kevin Wright
> I'll leave you with a great snippet from Glen Vanderberg:
>>> http://www.vanderburg.org/blog/Software/Development/sharp_and_blunt.rdoc
>>
>>
>> That's a horrifyingly condescending quote making fun of people who
>> actually ship software.
>>
>>
>>
> Why, do you genuinely
2011/3/22 Cédric Beust ♔
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Kevin Wright wrote:
>
>> Repeated case studies have shown time and time again that imperative code
>> is harder to reason about
>>
>
> Come on now. I was going to ask you for some evidence to back up this claim
> but the fact that th
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Kevin Wright wrote:
> Repeated case studies have shown time and time again that imperative code
> is harder to reason about
>
Come on now. I was going to ask you for some evidence to back up this claim
but the fact that there are millions of lines of code written
>
> Hmm it's true that Ruby got a boost due to Rails, but I am not sure
> you can generalize like that. Rails unique use of generators and
> conventions is a result of dynamic typing and very (too?) flexible
> syntax. And looking around it seems as if RoR caters to a certain
> niche of greenfield/g
So in summary we are saying that a well stocked toolbox results in the
job being done well, provided the toolbox matches the job, and that
this fosters uptake. Depth is required for longevity however.
On Mar 22, 3:28 pm, Casper Bang wrote:
> On Mar 22, 3:44 pm, phil swenson wrote:
>
> > I think
On Mar 22, 3:44 pm, phil swenson wrote:
> I think what Fantom (or any other language trying to gain traction) needs is
> a really good full stack web framework. Before Rails, Ruby was very
> obscure.
Hmm it's true that Ruby got a boost due to Rails, but I am not sure
you can generalize like that
Seems Microsoft is making more revenue from Android than Google.
--
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
If I wanted to adopt a new language to implement some tricksy code
(for example to do CFD modelling) I'd be looking for a full stack to
give me a compiler, tight test, build and CI integration, solid IDE
support including full debug (local and remote), and a low pain
threshold when using the langua
> I think you're kidding yourselves if you think you can make a bullet
> list that will explain the next big language.
I'm not sure the discussion here is trying to do that although I agree
with your point.
> At best, you can make
> one that explains what you would like to see. Unless you have
I think what Fantom (or any other language trying to gain traction) needs is
a really good full stack web framework. Before Rails, Ruby was very
obscure.
So my advice to the Scala, Fantom, Mirah, etc world would be: copy Rails.
That's what Groovy did and Groovy has definitely gained traction.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Casper Bang wrote:
>> (That is to say, I hear more interest in
>> obj-c than I do in any of the languages that have ever been mentioned
>> here as "the next big thing.")
>
> I think we can all agree that Obj-C would be dead a buried if it had
> not been for Apple'
> (That is to say, I hear more interest in
> obj-c than I do in any of the languages that have ever been mentioned
> here as "the next big thing.")
I think we can all agree that Obj-C would be dead a buried if it had
not been for Apple's disrespect for developers, often caught in a
variation of th
I think you're kidding yourselves if you think you can make a bullet
list that will explain the next big language. At best, you can make
one that explains what you would like to see. Unless you have the
power of someone like Jobs, than getting the rest of the world to
agree is a non-starter. (Th
Wow, that's some raving scala fanboyism again, Kevin. At the end you resort
to outright lies. You didn't understand most of my points, apparently, so
I'll attempt to clarify where I can.
On Tuesday, March 22, 2011 12:35:15 PM UTC+1, KWright wrote:
>
>
> I have to disagree with this evaluation of
On 22 March 2011 11:20, Phil wrote:
> I'm in the UK, my spare time and energies are currently elsewhere,
> perhaps in the autumn I will be looking to do something - before
> Devoxx so that I can also get the maximum benefit of the Scala
> presentations there too.
>
You should check out these gu
On 22 March 2011 11:02, Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
> I've never run into anyone that is holding off on Fantom because it lacks
> 'true' generics.
>
> Scala's problem is that it tries to change too much, but Fantom's problem
> is that it doesn't change enough; no matter what people tell you, its f
I'm in the UK, my spare time and energies are currently elsewhere,
perhaps in the autumn I will be looking to do something - before
Devoxx so that I can also get the maximum benefit of the Scala
presentations there too.
On Mar 22, 11:05 am, Kevin Wright wrote:
> On 22 March 2011 09:51, Phil wrot
On 22 March 2011 09:51, Phil wrote:
> I don't think anybody would argue that a functional
> language can be more complex than an OO one.
>
People *will* argue that, but it's like arguing that JSP can be more complex
than hibernate. The two things are completely distinct and can be used
together
Microsoft just sued B&N based on their use of android in the Nook. Patent
lawsuit.
Apple just sued Amazon for "App Store" name. Trademark lawsuit.
Very tiresome.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send
On Tuesday, March 22, 2011 8:45:01 AM UTC+1, Casper Bang wrote:
>
> Linus Torvalds calls the matter bugus and the poeple behind attention-
> whores:
> http://www.itworld.com/open-source/140916/android-sued-microsoft-not-linux
And he's right.
--
You received this message because you are subsc
I fell over this too. There's a nasty implicit logic error there: "most
popular language based on paradigm X is seemingly bad at Y and Z, so let's
conclude that paradigm X is 'clearly' anti-Y and anti-Z". That, and it
sounds a little too arrogant. I'm aware this might sound a little
hypocritica
I've never run into anyone that is holding off on Fantom because it lacks
'true' generics.
Scala's problem is that it tries to change too much, but Fantom's problem is
that it doesn't change enough; no matter what people tell you, its fairly
obvious (to me anyway, YMMV) that changing something
If Fantom gains true generics, hopefully it can attract some of those
that wants something more powerful than Java but not as advanced as
Scala. There's clearly a missing hybrid piece which Java/Oracle won't
fill and thus people jump to Scala - funny enough many of the same
people who have been cla
I read Jonathan's and Cedric's posts (and many of the comments) and
both to be balanced and informative (in contrast to some of the
comments). I don't think anybody would argue that a functional
language can be more complex than an OO one, but it is a shame that
the tools still seem to be lacking -
I've just been pointed to a techcrunch post -
http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/22/amazon-android-app-store-3 - by a
colleague and the most interesting part is the way that Amazon allow
you to try before you buy. In the web browser - fantastic (even if it
does use flash).
Must look into the Amazon st
Linus Torvalds calls the matter bugus and the poeple behind attention-
whores:
http://www.itworld.com/open-source/140916/android-sued-microsoft-not-linux
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java
39 matches
Mail list logo
