Sure, the java libraries are no paragons of simplicity, but then, they are kinda old. Until Clojure shows me that it has a good plan in place to version up its own libraries I'm not going to be impressed.
I'll never switch languages just because they refreshed the libraries according to the state of the art on design. That just sets me up for an endless series of disappointments as my seemingly perfect take on how libraries are to be written end up having brainfarts in weird little places and a few years down the road we'll have the next language that sells itself as a revolution but is really just an API update. This, as a process, doesn't scale. Now, a language that is built from the ground up to version _everything_ including its own core library without much hassle, now that could fix its API problems in a natural progression without a backwards incompatiblity break (see py3k for what happens when you try to do it that way). However, as far as I can tell neither Scala nor Clojure seem to have a good way to do this. Gosu might be on to something with the ability to create 'fronts' - meta-APIs letting you keep the original badly designed classes in place but treat them as if they had a cleaner API, with the compiler serving as translator between the nice new API and the crappy old one. In regards to your glyph class: Yes, a fine example of how the community pressure to do the appropriate thing is wildly different between 2 languages. But, is straight ints 'simpler' than a dedicated class? It's certainly less lines/words/chars, but simpler? I'm inclined to think it really isn't. -- 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.
