Re:Is Scala really more complicated than Java?
by osipov on Friday September 18, 2009 @01:58PM
(#830747)
No apologies needed, I thought your comment about learning formal type theory and your book recommendation were valuable. My comment was based on the premise of this thread (per the title) and the premise of the article.
Re:Is Scala really more complicated than Java?
by joe_the_user on Friday September 18, 2009 @07:41PM
(#831406)
An interesting thing about this article is it makes me think about just how natural the english-fragments within mainstream (c-like) languages are.
Loosely speaking, a c-like English would be: "For each tree in the grove, paint on the stem"
But what would a Scala-like sentence be??? "trees in the grove - paint circles on their stems"???
Re:Is Scala really more complicated than Java?
by rincewind on Saturday September 19, 2009 @04:38AM
(#831795)
That might show that idioms from C got into your english, not the other way round:
"For every cookie in the jar; I ate that cookie" vs. "I ate all the cookies from the cookie jar" vs. "The cookie jar is empty"
(the last one assumes that the cookie jar was type-safe and contained nothing but cookies)
" then as I pointed out, Scala is more complex than Java."
I didn't comment (either way) on this.
I was just trying to say learning type theory worked well for me when I was learning languages with powerful type systems (Haskell in my case), especially in understanding type errors. It may or may not work for you. It is just an experience report/suggestion.
I don't care if Scala is more complex than Java or not. Apologies if you thought I was making a claim to that effect.