Replacing Java with Scala doesn't mean you're trading in an object-oriented programming language for a functional programming language. Scala is an object-oriented programming language too. In fact, it has more advanced OO features (traits, singletons, path-dependent types, to name a few) than Java does.
You're trading an OO programming language for another OO programming language, with more advanced OO features, that also has some functional features.
--j
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Yang Sai
<yangsai1119@...> wrote:
Hello all,
Today I came across with this blog post:
http://macstrac.blogspot.com/2009/04/scala-as-long-term-replacement-for.html
Seems like James has great faith in Scala. I do, too, as Scala has got
many amazing strengths. But to replace Java?
I've come across with this Introduction to Functional Languages
lately: http://java.dzone.com/articles/introduction-functional . One
statement was that "An important observation is that functional
languages are not a replacement for procedural or object-oriented
programming language", which I totally agree with. The “polygot
programmer” seems to be the future trend for me.
So what's your view on it?
Cheers,
--
Sai Yang
Beijing 51CTO Information Technology Ltd
