Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:39:32 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > bearophile wrote: >> Walter: >> >>> Java made a related mistake by failing to acknowledge that value types >>> have any useful purpose at all (unless they are built-in). >> >> Java was designed to be simple! Simple means to have a more uniform >> semantics. > > So was Pascal. See the thread about how useless it was as a result.
Blablabla.. this nostalgic lesson reminded me, have you even started studying the list of type system concepts I listed few days ago. A new version with links is coming at some point of time. >> What I miss more in Java is not single structs (single values), > > There's a lot more to miss than that. I find Java code tends to be > excessively complex, and that's because it lacks expressive power. Adding structs to Java wouldn't fix that. You probably know that. Unifying structs and classes in a language like D and adding good escape analysis wouldn't worsen the performance that badly in general purpose applications. Java is mostly used for general purpose programming so your claims about usefulness and the need for extreme performance look silly.
