Re: The Revenge of the Geeks
From: Arne Vajhøj <arne_at_vajhoej.dk>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:37:18 -0500
Message-ID: <51018d71$0$289$14726298_at_news.sunsite.dk>
>> On 1/23/2013 4:25 AM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>> I am a bit skeptical about that as a general approach.
>> If the situation were that Java programs were almost always correct
>> but that what took time was writing all the boilerplate code, then
>> switching to Scala would be an obvious choice.
>> But I don't see that. I see a large portion of Java developers not
>> mastering Java and switching them to Scala would be one big
>> fucking disaster.
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 14:37:18 -0500
Message-ID: <51018d71$0$289$14726298_at_news.sunsite.dk>
On 1/24/2013 2:31 PM, Arved Sandstrom wrote: > On 01/23/2013 09:13 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 1/23/2013 4:25 AM, Arved Sandstrom wrote:
>>> On 01/23/2013 02:21 AM, BGB wrote: >>>> On 1/22/2013 11:33 PM, Kevin McMurtrie wrote: >>>>> In article >>>>> Yes, it is a shame that Oracle runs Java but Sun wasn't so great at it >>>>> either. Both pushed for high cost, high complexity "enterprise >>>>> edition" >>>>> libraries that come and go like fashion but dragged their feet on >>>>> streamlining the language itself. >>>> >>>> much agreed... >>>> >>>> the lack of "streamlining" of the core language is admittedly one of my >>>> bigger complaints about Java at present. >>>> >>>> this is along with what few new features are added to the core language >>>> (and to the JVM) are IMO far too often via ugly hacks. >>> >>> I'm not too worried about Java the language being close to stagnant, so >>> long as library development is up to par. Because if the solution I've >>> selected includes the JVM, then often Scala or Clojure are better >>> choices for high-productivity coding. Myself I don't care if Java the >>> language ever gets updated again - it's not important. The innovation >>> shifted away from Java the language years ago; there are better JVM >>> options now. >>
>> I am a bit skeptical about that as a general approach.
>>
>> If the situation were that Java programs were almost always correct
>> but that what took time was writing all the boilerplate code, then
>> switching to Scala would be an obvious choice.
>>
>> But I don't see that. I see a large portion of Java developers not
>> mastering Java and switching them to Scala would be one big
>> fucking disaster.
> > As a general approach I'd have to agree. OTOH for the unknown percentage > of Java programmers who are actually competent, which is the group I had > in mind, there are tasks that are best done in another JVM language. The > interop for Clojure<=>Java and Scala<=>Java is pretty good. > > For the incompetent group they shouldn't be programming at all.
I agree.
But that means nothing.
Because they still do.
Arne Received on Thu Jan 24 2013 - 20:37:18 CET