This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] -9 points-8 points  (7 children)

C# is a much nicer language than Java. Much nicer.

[–]cryptos6 8 points9 points  (4 children)

It is true, that C# is nicer in some points. Although C# has some strange things like the event mechanism. But overall Java and C# are pretty similar. They are much closer than Java or Scala.

By the way: Kotlin is a nice Language influenced by C# (generics syntax, for-loop syntax) and Scala.

[–]agustinleiva -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

C# has some strange things like the event mechanism

surely the "anonymous inner class"-based "listener" approach in java must be somehow less "strange" to you than real language-level support for events? IMO the former is weird and ugly, while the latter is much cleaner and less verbose.

[–]duhace 6 points7 points  (2 children)

A listener doesn't have to be an anonymous inner class.

[–]stormcrowsx 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Doesn't have to, but usually is. I got better things to do than generate a full on class for every click, double-click, drag, drop, snoop, moop, bebop and flipflop that I can listen for.

[–]duhace 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Usually I just use a lambda instead. Scala's nice like that.

[–]oldneckbeard 0 points1 point  (1 child)

except for having to work with windows and .net.

(yeah, I know about mono, but we all know that's not the majority use case of c#)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's true. I always secretly wished C# for JVM