[Haskell-cafe] How to fulfill the "code-reuse" destiny of OOP?

[Martin Coxall]

On 13 Jan 2010, at 09:51, Peter Verswyvelen wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 2:57 AM, Gregory Collins <greg at gregorycollins.net> wrote:
> Doing OO-style programming in Haskell is difficult and unnatural, it's
> true (although technically speaking it is possible). That said, nobody's
> yet to present a convincing argument to me why Java gets a free pass for
> lacking closures and typeclasses.
> 
> I might be wrong, but doesn't Java's concepts of inner classes and interfaces together with adapter classes can be used to replace closures and typeclasses in a way?

Inner classes are not a semantic replacement for closures, even if you discount horrific syntax. Inner classes do not close over their lexical environment.

Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/attachments/20100113/2bd8300c/attachment.html