I read Jonathan's and Cedric's posts (and many of the comments) and both to be balanced and informative (in contrast to some of the comments). I don't think anybody would argue that a functional language can be more complex than an OO one, but it is a shame that the tools still seem to be lacking - something Cedric added more detail around. Java was better served inside seven years but there are still areas where the tooling is neglected or less than perfect. Demand will elicit supply, so as any new language (it feels a bit strange to refer albeit indirectly to Scala as a new language) gains traction more people go looking for tools and a percentage of those people will contribute to the tools themselves.
All said, Scala is still the functional language I will turn to when I have the time to look at one in more detail. But sorry, Dick, I'm on the wrong continent for training! On Mar 21, 4:44 pm, ranjith <[email protected]> wrote: > OK I did not say it - > (Sorry to post a link, but it is worth > it.)http://alarmingdevelopment.org/?p=562 > > Dick, I am looking at you too.. > Here is what Cedric beust > said..http://beust.com/weblog/2011/02/23/from-scala-back-to-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.
