> Java simply refused to learn from previous language's mistakes.
You probably never programmed in C++ before. Trust me on that, Java was a breath of fresh air and it was obvious to everyone that it learned a lot from past languages.
> No, because it's not like Java was the first language to ponder about these, and it did not learn from previous languages (mistakes or successes). Pretty much all of Scala's improvements over Java predate Java itself by decades.
Maybe, but if these features had been put in Java in 1995, it's very unlikely it would have met the success it knows today.
Sometimes, the hard part in language design is knowing what feature not to add. Java did great in that respect.
Scala... not so much, if the language complexity is any indication.
You probably never programmed in C++ before. Trust me on that, Java was a breath of fresh air and it was obvious to everyone that it learned a lot from past languages.
> No, because it's not like Java was the first language to ponder about these, and it did not learn from previous languages (mistakes or successes). Pretty much all of Scala's improvements over Java predate Java itself by decades.
Maybe, but if these features had been put in Java in 1995, it's very unlikely it would have met the success it knows today.
Sometimes, the hard part in language design is knowing what feature not to add. Java did great in that respect.
Scala... not so much, if the language complexity is any indication.