Whereas a language that requires you to jump through hoops to get things done, is a good language? Your own Lombok is a pretty good example of that, a hack layer stuffed in between language and IDE, to make up for previous inferior and erroneous decisions.
On Nov 13, 9:04 pm, Reinier Zwitserloot <[email protected]> wrote: > A language with 100 outdated features almost nobody uses anymore > because they are obscure or simply not really needed anymore due to > optimisations, is a bad language. > > On Nov 12, 6:13 am, Casper Bang <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Exception C# (the language) will be stuck with it. > > > How so? Why does the fact that you can choose stack allocation up- > > front today, prevent any future similar optimization of heap object > > graphs that you just described? > > > C# tends to not dictate the world so much as Java. Want pass-by- > > reference? You can have it. Want pointers? No problem. > > > Future optimizations are always nice, but not neccesarily at the > > expence of the past. Example, Java enums are superior to C# enums, yet > > you had to do roll your own pseudo-enums the first 10 years in Java. -- 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.
