Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!69.16.185.11.MISMATCH!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Lew Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Static type checking: hybrid mode in Groovy Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:28:25 -0800 (PST) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 47 Message-ID: <70683.45.1321550905474.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prms22> References: <61e17074-e229-4303-a549-2389ccf502d3@m10g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> Reply-To: comp.lang.java.programmer@googlegroups.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 173.164.137.214 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: posting.google.com 1321551887 23581 127.0.0.1 (17 Nov 2011 17:44:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 17:44:47 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=173.164.137.214; posting-account=CP-lKQoAAAAGtB5diOuGlDQk0jIwmH0T User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:10008 Roedy Green wrote: > Robert Klemme wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said : >> "One of them is that Java programmers who discover Groovy are often >> amazed about the conciseness of the language as compared to Java, and >> start programming in Groovy like they would in Java, that is to say >> with types and leveraging the syntax of Groovy. The key here is that >> many programmers never use the dynamic features of Groovy, but rather >> use the language as a "better Java syntax"." > > The verbosity of Java has always bothered me. Early on I lobbied for > various measures to put it on a diet. The biggest win was for:each. > The Java creators are only now beginning to relax their resistance to > syntactic sugar to make programs terser, hence easier to type and > proofread. Conciseness is overrated. > I think the problem was/is: > > 1. Sun was far more interested in the JVM than the Java language. In Evidence? > their view, Javac.exe was just a preprocessor for the JVM byte code. > It was a necessary kludge, but of no interest in itself. The innards > of the JVM is the exciting part. Java the language is pretty dull and clumsy. Unsubstantiable opinion. > The WORA comes from the JVM, not a major revolution in the > language. > > 2. People who write system code think a long time and produce a small > number of carefully-chosen keystrokes, overwhelmingly comments. > Application programmers crank out reams and reams of twaddle. Thus Oh, really? Are you an application programmer? > system programmers have little motivation to be interested in > terseness. Wow. -- Lew