RE: Another nit

Just for the record, I agree with Dave's conclusion. Java is fast losing its
simplicity because it was designed from the beginning to have no more of a
"core vision" than to be a poor man's C++, and I think that was a poor
decision on Gosling's part. Scala's design and vision seems much more "hung
together" than that.

Ted Neward
Java, .NET, XML Services
Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing
http://www.tedneward.com
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Webb [mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2007 4:58 AM
> To: scala-list
> Subject: Re: Another nit
> 
> > my objection is partly due to this. as Gosling said,
> > Java is easier to read. it's a great virtue for a
> > language to be easier to read. for a language with
> > type inference, however, implicit defs could very well
> > invite stupid bugs (it reads like something but does
> > something else).
> 
> One of the great strengths with Java was always its simplicity and
> readibility. Dumb people (e.g. me) could pick it up and run with it
> without
> needing to dig into the language too far. There's a diffference between
> 'dumbing down' and simplicity. Simplicity means that things work out of
> the
> box intuitively. Everything hangs together nicely without hidden
> surprises.
> Making things simple is hard work and needs intelligence and feel. And
> sometimes that does mean sacrificing some of the power. But simplicity
> should come first if a language is going to go mainstream.
> 
> I think that's the great opportunity for Scala right now, to take a
> quantum
> leap beyond Java while retaining the simplicity that Java's fast losing.
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/653 - Release Date: 1/26/2007
> 11:11 AM
> 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.14/658 - Release Date: 1/29/2007
2:49 PM