What I meant is not incompatibility of basic types across languages but the tendency to create named classes where they are not needed. For example the OOP tell

What I meant is not incompatibility of basic types across languages but the tendency to create named classes where they are not needed. For example the OOP tells us to create UserList.java instead of using List<User> because it allows attach behavior and preserve encapsulation. Having 325 results for UserList.java in Krugle: http://opensearch.krugle.org/document/search/#query=userlist&language=Java http://opensearch.krugle.org/document/search/#query=userlist... I can't image how to create globally reusable function that has the list of users in the signature.