Content deleted Content added
Link Tag: Reverted |
Undid revision 1292283394 by 187.158.38.155 (talk) Tidying up. |
||
Line 25:
I didn't write the first comment about it being too self-promoting, but it certainly has that feel. Here's an example sentence: "Scala provides a unique combination of language mechanisms that make it easy to smoothly add new language constructs in the form of libraries". The word "unique" is particularly objectionable. There are (at least) thousands of interpreted languages out there. Is scala truly the only one for which it is "easy to smoothly add new language constructs in the form of libraries" to?
: IMHO, if 'unique' is kept, it should be supported by an external quote / citation. Alternatively, what about calling it a 'novel' approach. The way Scala can be extended is indeed strikingly different from what we know of other mainstream languages (It's not dynamically rebinding a prototype and it's not some kind of macro feature) [[Special:Contributions/93.104.71.211|93.104.71.211]] ([[User talk:93.104.71.211|talk]]) 23:08, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
| |||