Oops, my sock puppet was busted. :-)
On Dec 24, 10:31 am, James Iry <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah if scala.List is differnt from java.util.List means that Scala is
> incompatible with Java then Java is incompatible with itself because
> it has java.util.List and java.awt.List also it has java.util.Date and
> java.sql.Date. And a bunch of others. Hahaha.
>
> Thanks for the tip about conversions. I guess it would be nice if
> Scala could do that conversion without the import but the import is no
> big deal.
>
> Java was my first language and then I learned Ruby. I really liked
> Ruby but I missed strong typing. I read something by David Pollock
> that said that Scala was like a strong typed ruby so I started
> learning it. It's really easy so far. It's a lot like Java but
> closures are like Ruby blocks and I don't write so many types.
>
> Renier says that enterprise developers can't handle Scala because the
> syntax is different from Java or C. He must think we're very stupid.
> I'm going to do like you are and ignore him. I don't like being
> called stupid.
>
> On Dec 24, 9:33 am, James Iry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
>
> > Thanks for investigating rather than taking such claims on face
> > value. Indeed, the Scala language is compatible with Java's List
> > hierarchy. As you point out, scala.List is just another class which
> > you can use or not use.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
