4 ms·

Part 1 says that the future of Java is really porting other languages (JRuby, Jython, Scala, etc.) to the JVM and enhancing the JVM to support them. Very littl

by russell 18y ago

Part 1 says that the future of Java is really porting other languages (JRuby, Jython, Scala, etc.) to the JVM and enhancing the JVM to support them. Very little is said about Java itself. Perhaps that will be discussed in part 2. I, for one, would like to see a new Java that is less verbose and has better idioms for my tired fingers.

dreish 18y ago
If that's what you want, why not use one of the many fine languages available that target the JVM? May I recommend a lovely Clojure -- dynamic but type hintable, with ridiculously easy Java interop?
- russell 18y ago
  You are right, of course. Right now I am in the early stages of a gig where I have sole responsibility for 400K lines of an orphaned enterprise package written with all correct fads (sorry frameworks). To make matters even more fun, it is about 25% of the way through a transition from struts to flex. Turning this thing around is like doing high speed maneuvers in a super tanker. Anyway apologies for my muttering, but your suggestion is welcome.
  - dreish 18y ago
    It might not go over well in a paid gig. Corporate tech managers do tend to freak out about Lisps and low-market-share languages in general. One strategy that might help is to be brutally honest about how long it might take in Java, and how much cheaper it would be in a JVM-hosted dynamic language. But obviously if you don't already have enough experience with an alternative language to make a confident estimate, it would be a crazy gamble.
    - russell 18y ago
      Consulting gigs are funny. Some dont let you pee without an escort (literally), others, like this one, turn over the keys to the crown jewels. If I say it will be 2x cheaper there will be no problem. The only stumbling block is that the owner really likes the part implemented in flex and I am a little reluctant to continue with a proprietary system. Any views either way?
dkarl 18y ago
Scala isn't really a port; it's practically a Java native. Its primary creator had a lot to do with the development of Java, and despite being originally targeted toward both the JVM and the CLR, the Scala project has focused primarily on the JVM. As mentioned in the article, Scala can be used as a "better Java" and is much easier on the fingers (notably because it has type inference, but also because it supports functional programming better than Java.)

by russell 18y ago

dreish 18y ago

If that's what you want, why not use one of the many fine languages available that target the JVM? May I recommend a lovely Clojure -- dynamic but type hintable, with ridiculously easy Java interop?

russell 18y ago
You are right, of course. Right now I am in the early stages of a gig where I have sole responsibility for 400K lines of an orphaned enterprise package written with all correct fads (sorry frameworks). To make matters even more fun, it is about 25% of the way through a transition from struts to flex. Turning this thing around is like doing high speed maneuvers in a super tanker. Anyway apologies for my muttering, but your suggestion is welcome.
- dreish 18y ago
  It might not go over well in a paid gig. Corporate tech managers do tend to freak out about Lisps and low-market-share languages in general. One strategy that might help is to be brutally honest about how long it might take in Java, and how much cheaper it would be in a JVM-hosted dynamic language. But obviously if you don't already have enough experience with an alternative language to make a confident estimate, it would be a crazy gamble.
  - russell 18y ago
    Consulting gigs are funny. Some dont let you pee without an escort (literally), others, like this one, turn over the keys to the crown jewels. If I say it will be 2x cheaper there will be no problem. The only stumbling block is that the owner really likes the part implemented in flex and I am a little reluctant to continue with a proprietary system. Any views either way?

dkarl 18y ago

Scala isn't really a port; it's practically a Java native. Its primary creator had a lot to do with the development of Java, and despite being originally targeted toward both the JVM and the CLR, the Scala project has focused primarily on the JVM. As mentioned in the article, Scala can be used as a "better Java" and is much easier on the fingers (notably because it has type inference, but also because it supports functional programming better than Java.)