3 ms·
I read this as "Java is dead" in the sense that it isn't evolving any more in any useful way.
by ConradHex 18y ago
I read this as "Java is dead" in the sense that it isn't evolving any more in any useful way.
- thomasmallen 18y agoThat's why volcanologists make the distinction between "dormant" and "extinct."
- silentbicycle 18y ago"Java has gone stagnant" makes for a much less punchy headline.
- axod 18y agoHow does it need to evolve? Unlike a lot of languages, they got some things right from the start - Unicode for example.
- jmtulloss 18y agoThat's what this article was talking about, and the article the author wrote a few years ago (linked in this article) give even more reasons.
- michaelneale 18y agoI think the article makes sense. But I don't see why inner classes would have to go in the face of closures - they are simply a nested version of a existing structure - not really a new structure.