It's funny how I read that blog and agreed with every point except the part
about throwing out existing JVM alternative languages.

For all of these people writing about how we need a Java.NEXT that isn't
Scala/Groovy/Clojure/JRuby, please go write us this language.   Otherwise,
you're stuck with what others are innovating, and that is Clojure, Scala,
Groovy, JRuby, etc.


On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 3:52 PM, [email protected] <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Interesting:
> http://www.jroller.com/scolebourne/entry/the_next_big_jvm_language1
>
> He makes some good points, although I would also advocate
>
> 1) building more literals into The Next Big JVM Language such as
> literal collections [], regular expressions /REGEXGOES HERE/, etc
> (basically what groovy/ruby have)
> 2) optional dynamic typing
>
> --
> 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]<javaposse%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
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.

Reply via email to