RE: scala (was good site for programming tutorials)

  • From: "Sina Bahram" <sbahram@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "'Jamal Mazrui'" <empower@xxxxxxxxx>, <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2010 10:53:30 -0400

I totally agree on the language war avoidance. No worries there, Jamal.

I do have to correct you though. Lisp does not require functional programming. 
This is an extremely oversimplification of the
language. Functional programming implies a paradigm which emphasizes the 
application of functions over changes in state. It's a pure
extension of the lambda calculus, whereby all functions return a value and this 
value does not change except with changes to inputs
into said function; thus avoiding state or mutability of any kind. Such a 
restriction does not exist in lisp. There are programming
languages like F# which are more functional programming languages, but even in 
those, I believe it is possible to have mappings
which are not one-to-one with input parameters, side effects , and some 
semblance of mutability. In functional programming.

Lisp is a multi-paradigm programming language. It supported OOP before it was 
called that, and had things like annotations before
Windows was an operating system. It also can be used as a procedural, 
functional, object oriented, service oriented, inductive,
deductive, and/or annotation based language, all within the same program, if 
you like, and that's just to name a few paradigms.

Take care,

-----Original Message-----
From: Jamal Mazrui [mailto:empower@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 8:04 AM
To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Sina Bahram
Subject: Re: scala (was good site for programming tutorials)

Let us avoid language wars here, but I think Scala is much more readable and 
practical than LISP.  Scala does not require functional
programming like LISP.  OOP is fully supported, but functional programming is 
also solidly supported.  It is called Scala because it
is intended as a scalable language, where one can use advanced features as 
needed.  In my opinion, Scala is a revolutionary
language, not just in the ivory tower but in the real world as well.


On 8/26/2010 12:49 AM, Sina Bahram wrote:
> Not to be pedantic  or anything, but most of the "advantages of java" so to 
> speak stem from the nature of the language itself, so
> might be a bit disingenuous, pedagogically speaking, to say that all Java's 
> advantages exist, because I would submit that it's
> important ones, absolutely do not.
> Don't' get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of languages like Scala, although I tend 
> to just use a language that can do everything Scala
> and more, called Lisp, if I want that sort of thing.
> Take care,
> Sina
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of QuentinC
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2010 12:31 AM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: scala (was good site for programming tutorials)
> Interesting site.
> If scala compiles into java bytecode, then all advantages of java are 
> available.
> Note that swing interfaces are not inaccessible. You juste have to install 
> the java access bridge and then most of swing API
> accessible. There are few problems with the advanced controls, but the 
> standard ones go well.
> And about turning a java program into windows executable, there is launch4j.
> This program wrap a jar file into an exe.
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at 
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at

View the list's information and change your settings at

Other related posts: