If java was taking things out as it added new things in, then we'd have a good debate on our hands. Alas, they don't seem to be taking this stance, and instead are adding in more and more (just slowly) without removing any of the cruft.
Despite reading your many "scala" rants on HN, I still don't know which features you think are 'terrible', just that you think there are some that confuse you and/or are allow you to something multiple ways (abstract classes vs. interfaces with concrete implementations say what???).
Care to actually articulate the 'terrible' features this time?
Java can't take stuff out, at least not anything major. Java's adoption is two or three orders of magnitude higher than most languages out there (except C/C++); you can't make so many millions of developers go back and change 10 or 15 year-old code. One of the reasons it's this popular is that it's consistently backwards compatible.
I don't want to be dragged into the Scala discussion again (after all, these are just opinions; I realize some people really like Scala, but for some reason, Scala people just find it hard to accept the very real fact that some people don't like it, and it's not because they haven't tried it or don't understand it).
Despite reading your many "scala" rants on HN, I still don't know which features you think are 'terrible', just that you think there are some that confuse you and/or are allow you to something multiple ways (abstract classes vs. interfaces with concrete implementations say what???).
Care to actually articulate the 'terrible' features this time?