>> The real issue is that mediocre programmers can create a worse mess in >> a language that doesn't enforce types and maybe other restrictions >> than one that does. > > The real question here has nothing to do with Java, Groovy, static or > dynamic, it is to do with why organization continue to employ > sub-standard software developers, fail to train them to be competent, > and then expect to get top-quality software.
Because they can and they don't know any better. I wish I'd written my part a bit differently, because even a great programmer can make a complete mess in an environment he's not familiar with. > I think demanding that programming language should hamstring the capable > to protect against the incompetent is to solve the wrong problem in the > wrong way. That's not what I said and I think you know that. Most if not all protections you can give actually help good programmers to write expressive code. > If Oracle do not get lambdas into Java at the next main release then > Java really is headed for the scrap pile. I'd love to agree, but each 'industry programmer' who I meet who uses C# for example doesn't really know what a lambda is apart from perhaps that LINQ uses them. I think it'll take more than that to kill Java, though perhaps it will lose some limbs (mobile, desktop, university education). -- 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.
