5 ms·
> Scala is not C++. That was not the point. The comparison is that Scala is to Java what C++ is to C. Powerful and flexible but with a lot of baggage that end
by laureny 13y ago
> Scala is not C++.
That was not the point. The comparison is that Scala is to Java what C++ is to C.
Powerful and flexible but with a lot of baggage that ends up making it impractical.
- trailfox 13y ago> The comparison is that Scala is to Java what C++ is to C. Which is pure opinion/speculation.
- pkolaczk 13y agoNope. C++ is almost a superset of C (there are a few minor differences, but most C programs are correct C++ programs). Even the most basic Scala program is not a valid Java program. They are just two different languages targetting the same platform. If making analogies, a much closer analogy would be to say Scala is to Java what D or Rust is to C++. As of lots of baggage - can you elaborate? Only null comes to my mind and it is never an issue - it was left because Scala is practical. Sure, there are some limitations imposed by the target platform like lack of TCO, lack of efficient suport for tuples/value-types, or RTTI for generics being not powerful enough, but Java-the-language has nothing to do with it. The same limitations apply to Kotlin and Ceylon.