Comments on: Language Choice Overload http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload (permanently in beta) Sun, 29 Aug 2010 20:01:44 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Casper Bang http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3054 Casper Bang Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:16:51 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3054 @KoW The difference is that .NET had the benefit of looking at Java and have made certain compromises (no class loader, no interpretation etc.) while at the same time being very pragmatic about it, i.e. added language level constructs such that developers do not necessarily need a CS degree to use it. It was also designed from the ground up for interoperability and multiple languages so while JNI is a pain in the *beep* it is quite natural on .NET to issue a pinvoke if you need something from the platform or another layer sitting next to you. And of course, C# already has reified generics, closures, type inference, continuations, switch on strings, properties, events and all the other stuff we now whine about in Java. @KoW

The difference is that .NET had the benefit of looking at Java and have made certain compromises (no class loader, no interpretation etc.) while at the same time being very pragmatic about it, i.e. added language level constructs such that developers do not necessarily need a CS degree to use it.

It was also designed from the ground up for interoperability and multiple languages so while JNI is a pain in the *beep* it is quite natural on .NET to issue a pinvoke if you need something from the platform or another layer sitting next to you.

And of course, C# already has reified generics, closures, type inference, continuations, switch on strings, properties, events and all the other stuff we now whine about in Java.

]]> By: Daniel Spiewak http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3053 Daniel Spiewak Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:28:23 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3053 Because JVM developers are much louder, more annoying and more numerous than CLR devs. :-) Because JVM developers are much louder, more annoying and more numerous than CLR devs. :-)

]]> By: KoW http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3051 KoW Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:18:29 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3051 What strikes me is that there is .NET with several, probably more languages to choose from than for the JVM. Why doesn't anyone complain about language choice overload on this platform? What strikes me is that there is .NET with several, probably more languages to choose from than for the JVM. Why doesn’t anyone complain about language choice overload on this platform?

]]> By: bodhi http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3050 bodhi Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:05:50 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3050 I completely agree. But I don't see language overload as a problem (initially there will be some confusion), but as an opportunity. Even for large systems, Scala might not the only solution. It could be a combination of Scala,Ruby etc (Of course you can replace actual names with any language). I completely agree. But I don’t see language overload as a problem (initially there will be some confusion), but as an opportunity. Even for large systems, Scala might not the only solution. It could be a combination of Scala,Ruby etc (Of course you can replace actual names with any language).

]]> By: Daniel Spiewak http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3049 Daniel Spiewak Thu, 21 Feb 2008 04:34:47 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3049 @Casper lol Very nice indeed. @Steve Ah, I didn't know about the explicit modifier. That should make my life a bit easier the next time I'm unfortunate enough to have to write C++ classes. @Casper

lol Very nice indeed.

@Steve

Ah, I didn’t know about the explicit modifier. That should make my life a bit easier the next time I’m unfortunate enough to have to write C++ classes.

]]> By: Steve Lucord http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3048 Steve Lucord Thu, 21 Feb 2008 02:57:14 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3048 >For example, if you define a constructor class Person which takes a std::string, then suddenly >you have an implicit conversion from string to Person. Scala makes you be a bit more >declarative about your conversions, forcing you to add the *implicit* method modifier. If you declare the constructor as explicit (e.g. explicit Person( const std::string& ) ), the conversion is no longer implicit. >For example, if you define a constructor class Person which takes a std::string, then suddenly >you have an implicit conversion from string to Person. Scala makes you be a bit more >declarative about your conversions, forcing you to add the *implicit* method modifier.

If you declare the constructor as explicit (e.g. explicit Person( const std::string& ) ), the conversion is no longer implicit.

]]> By: Casper Bang http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3047 Casper Bang Thu, 21 Feb 2008 01:24:47 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3047 Yeah the typical Java problem of framework overload seems to be replaced or supplemented by language overload. We are in for a greeeat time where we no longer have the time to solve actual problems, we'll be too busy researching, comparing and selecting technologies. Yeah the typical Java problem of framework overload seems to be replaced or supplemented by language overload. We are in for a greeeat time where we no longer have the time to solve actual problems, we’ll be too busy researching, comparing and selecting technologies.

]]> By: Daniel Spiewak http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3040 Daniel Spiewak Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:15:01 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3040 @Tom Yes, I suppose you could say that. However, I tend to think that C++'s implicit conversions is an example of misapplication of "convention over configuration". Sometimes you don't want things to "just work", because often it will "just work wrongly". @Tom

Yes, I suppose you could say that. However, I tend to think that C++’s implicit conversions is an example of misapplication of “convention over configuration”. Sometimes you don’t want things to “just work”, because often it will “just work wrongly”.

]]> By: Daniel Spiewak http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3039 Daniel Spiewak Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:13:34 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3039 > And I am specifically objecting to and asking you to > quantify your description of Scala as “mid level” as > opposed to the “high level” Ruby and Groovy, which > you still don’t seem to have done. Point taken. Expect a post to be forthcoming on this subject... > And I am specifically objecting to and asking you to
> quantify your description of Scala as “mid level” as
> opposed to the “high level” Ruby and Groovy, which
> you still don’t seem to have done.

Point taken. Expect a post to be forthcoming on this subject…

]]> By: Tom http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload/comment-page-1#comment-3038 Tom Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:09:16 +0000 http://www.codecommit.com/blog/scala/language-choice-overload#comment-3038 Or could it be said that C++ and Scala both have the same level of implicit conversion, but that C++ uses convention over configuration? Or could it be said that C++ and Scala both have the same level of implicit conversion, but that C++ uses convention over configuration?

]]>