3 ms·
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, right? If you can't get all the Java programmers to switch to a functional programming language, just add enough functional fe
by kyllo 14y ago
If you can't beat 'em, join 'em, right?
If you can't get all the Java programmers to switch to a functional programming language, just add enough functional features to Java that you can do FP in it. It's genius, really.
Within another version or two, maybe Scala will be unnecessary.
- norswap 14y agoWhile the addition of functional features to Java is more than welcome and should continue, here's to hoping that Java never gets as needlessly complex as Scala.
- happy_dino 14y agoHaving gained experience with both, I can happily declare Java 8 to be finally more complex than Scala.
- kyllo 14y agoI'm not a Scala guy, but I think Scala allows one to write less complex code than is typically written in Java (1.7 or lower). Let's not confuse the complexity of the language itself, with the typical complexity of idiomatic code written in the language. Ruby is about as complex of a language as there is, the syntax and formal language spec are nothing short of baroque, but its flexibility and expressiveness allows you to write succinct, drop-dead simple code in it, that could only be expressed with pages of boilerplate in Java. Adding functional features to Java will make its spec and implementation more complex, but it can make actual Java code less complex.