I agree with everything you said except this particular point: On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]>wrote:
> In any java library that isn't completely worthless, the code is > "getField()". If you get annoyed at writing out the accessor, use > lombok. Claiming that as a benefit to scala seems like you're grasping > for reasons. > I think properties are a big deal and the little syntactic sugar they add helps reduce noise considerably. Actually, when I try to think of the top three features I'd like to see in Java, they are, in order of decreasing priority: 1. Properties 2. Closures 3. ... Of all the languages that implement properties, I think C# has the best syntax but Scala's is also great. I particularly like the class constructors and the case class constructors, both of which capture very elegantly what I want to do with my classes most of the time (take a few key values in the constructor, store them in fields and expose these fields as properties). Notice that I didn't fill item 3 above because I just can't come up with a feature that I think is as important as the first two. I'm leaning toward traits. -- Cédric -- 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.
