> There are two syntaxes, the arrow syntax and the colon-colon syntax, i think > there is consensus that the arrow syntax (the one Brian uses) is nice and > convenient.
I don’t really even think there’s consensus there; it is nice and convenient and mostly unobjectionable, but some felt “meh, what’s the point”, as it merely eliminates a few characters of typing. The implementation-by-delegation sub feature is far more substantial; it allows you to implement a class by wiring its declarations to existing reusable behaviors. This has far more potential benefit, but also more cost. > - using '=' to set a concise method make the syntax easy to confound with a > field initialization (something which is ok in Scala because the Scala syntax > also blur that distinction between a method call and a field access, it's > less ok in Java IMO). Please, can we not harp on notation unnecessarily? > I really dislike the notation Please, can we not harp on notation unnecessarily?
