Casper wrote:

> Eventually all the kinetic energy will have been depleted and I see little
> evidence of Oracle being able to boost it
>

Really? I certainly don't approve of everything that Oracle has done
regarding Java since they took over, but it's hard to argue against the
fact that they pulled off in one year what Sun wasn't able to achieve in
five: release a new major version of the JDK.

More or less yes, and I think it's pretty telling that in the last half a
> decade alternative languages on the JVM went from being a silly
> theoretical exercise to a necessity.
>

According to whom or what? Not a single one of these alternative languages
has managed to make even a small dent in Java's dominance. Groovy seems to
be the number two language on the JVM with a single digit percent in mind
share, followed by Scala with an even smaller portion.

Don't get me wrong, I love the energy of this field and I can't help but
get excited whenever I hear that a new language is coming out on the JVM,
but I have absolutely no illusion whatsoever that any of these languages is
a "necessity", much less on its way to replace the allegedly dying Java.


> Google should've bought Oracle, submittet a cleaned up rebooted Java and
> the JVM as an open standard and things could've looked much more
> interesting.
>

I am not really convinced that Google would have been more aggressive in
terms of adding new features to the language, so I think you would have
been equally disappointed by the results. Even if they did, it's unlikely
that their goals would have aligned with yours.

I am a bit surprised by the disproportionate attention that a lot of people
are paying to language features, to be honest, as if the existence or the
absence of certain features is going to be a decisive advantage to a
company or provide an endless amount of happiness to developers, magically
making them ten times more productive.

A successful language is a puzzle made of many pieces, of which syntax is
only one. I experiment with cutting edge languages all the time and I can
tell you that most of the time, the buzz provided by convenient native
support of properties or lambdas is very, very quickly negated by immature
tools, broken IDE support, the absence of interesting problems and clever
solutions, buggy libraries, incomplete documentation and nonexistent, and
sometimes hostile, communities.

I certainly have my beefs with the Java syntax and nothing would make me
happier than never having to implement a getter ever again, but no other
language, even outside the JVM, comes even close to matching it in most of
these other categories that are so often conveniently overlooked by
language purists.

-- 
Cédric

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "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