I agree, the problem is that while C# provides an evolutionary approach, Scala does not. I fear a lot of developers are lost between corporate legacy Java and state-of-the art Scala. There's are some alternatives gaining growth, like Fan, but without corporate backing these all seem like quite a bet few organizations are willing to make - and Sun seems determined to play the "java is still alive" while using the strength they have left, at arm-wrestling Adobe and ultimately Google.
Anyway, what I like about C# is the fact that it actually does real groundbreaking work and brings it beyond academia and out to the average developer. Lately with the realization that while static is preferable, dynamic is beneficial at times. It's less of an extremist attitude, which is why you now find .NET linked with such personalities as Martin Fowler and Gilad Bracha etc. /Casper On 1 Nov., 17:24, Noctiluque <[email protected]> wrote: > Poor etiquette, posting a link to my own blog, but in the last couple > of weeks I've realized just how far Java is behind C#. Maybe I should > have realized this long ago! The post is about my experience > translating a nice self contained C# .NET4 (in beta 2) program into > Scala 2.8 (pre release). The tragic thing is that the C# code is > pretty much equivelent to idiomatic Scala and (debatably) outclasses > Scala in a couple of areas. Java does not even come close to C# > anymore from a language features/expressivity point of view. Sniff. No > really. > > http://quoiquilensoit.blogspot.com/2009/11/scala-almost-as-good-as-c-... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
