>> Most of the language features you mention are already available with
>> alternative languges on Java 6. I suspect Scala covers all of those.
>
> Not at all, Scala doesn't do dynamic and sucks at interoperability. It
> has no properties, no anonymous types, no yield continuations etc.
Public variables in Scala *are* properties. Take a look at the
bytecode for class X { var x: Int = 5 }
>> Mono has some major downsides. A big one is Windows/Mac/Linux runtime
>> compatability. Pretty much all software that is written to the JDK
>> (including non-Java languages) works well across Windows/Mac/Linux.
>
> Yes as long as you don't attempt to do any UI work and can be
> satisfied by the JRE's lowest common denominator.
I do UI work. The biggest problem is the missing parts of the Java
library, such as MPEG-4 support, H.264 support, CD/DVD burning. The
app I mainly work on used to use the Java look and feel; now I've
changed it to use the native look and feel it is a lot more pleasant
(especially the file choosers, though I should probably use
java.awt.FileDialog instead).
>> With the CLI, .NET, and Mono this isn't the case at all. You can't run
>> C#/.NET software on C#/Mono and porting between the two is a big, big
>> deal.
>
> Sure you can, the C# standards under ISO/ECMA does not specify a
> windowing toolkit, so it's technically wrong when you make that
> statement.
C# is on version 4. As far as I know, the ECMA standard only covers
up to version 2.
--
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.
