On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Nick Wienholt <li...@dotnetperformance.com> wrote: > > it's about time the language got some "cool" > > features and damn the people that use them irresponsibly! > > The new dynamic features target very specific scenarios like COM interop - > Ander's is way too level-headed and experienced to be influenced by > coolness. > > I do agree that the new features do have potential to do harm - the > "let-add-a-design-pattern-here-because-it-make-me-look-smart" developer will > definitely abuse the new features. There ain't much you can do at a > language level to solve that - it's ultimately a HR issue for a development > shop with these people.
I suppose I'm just a bit surprised that it's gone this way, given that Java's approach to language features (and even C#'s suggested classical approach of "-100 for each feature") would seem to imply that there needs to be a significant reason for each thing. And certainly, with a reasonable degree of accuracy, it's fairly easy to see the reasoning behind each addition, but I don't think even the -100 accounts for "will the possible misuse of this outweigh the benefit". And whether or not the HR department takes appropriate action in time to prevent a maintenance headache is surely a reasonable question. AFAIT, there is *plenty* you can do at a language level to help people not use it stupidly (this is what compilation is; and other steps such as this can also help in this area). -- silky http://www.mirios.com.au/ http://island.mirios.com.au/t/rigby+random+20 empowerment! Third-class PEATY cerebral. Pimp wean slipperiness.
