Are you sure all the language developers are mad?
Posted Jun 4, 2009 19:28 UTC (Thu) by khim
In reply to: A look at two new languages: Vala and Clojure
Parent article: A look at two new languages: Vala and Clojure
Sure (and what is ironic about it?), but what I am claiming it
that it's not overly useful in a heavily imperative/OO context, given that
C++/Java/C# programmers have gone many years without it.
Then why it's added to C#, C++ (gcc 4.4 at least does have it), etc? Are
you sure developers do it because they all are mad?
Eclipse does a good enough job at filling out generics right
now for me.
Yup. Basically you are using type inference - just implemented
not in compiler as sane people are doing but in editor. And it produces
tons of useless clutter because it's implemented in wrong place.
We can't use GC in the lower level components of the GNOME
stack because then if you wanted to use a higher level language (like
OCaml!) on them, you'd have two different garbage collectors in the same
process which is a recipe for disaster.
Why is it a disaster? You can combine compiled Java code (GCJ) and
Scheme code (Guile) in a single process - and everything "just works".
Sure, it's not exactly super-fast (you are scanning some small regions of
memory twice), but no other problems are shown...
Anyways, you seem to be essentially saying that because Vala
isn't OCaml it must be broken, when there are actual engineering tradeoffs
that you're not recognizing.
Nope. If you want to see the language designed around existing
OO-system, but which is done right - take look on Groovy. It's not perfect
language is perfect) but it adds a lot of usefull features to Java while
reusing the same JVM. Sure, JVM does have richer set of features if
you compare it with GLib/GObject, but still the Vala is pretty pathetic
to post comments)