Scala's `new` syntax is an anomaly. I'd rather say `new[Foo](x, y, z)`, or just `new(x, y, z)` if `Foo` is the expected type.
-
@propensive@sgodbillon but “new” is about class, not type :-/ I prefer the Ruby way (http://Foo.new (x, y, z))
@dohzya @sgodbillon Ah, but the `Foo` in `http://Foo.new ` looks like a term then, which isn't necessarily the case... :/
-
-
@dohzya@sgodbillon I think the type vs class thing isn't insurmountable. It can always give an error, like when extending a non-class type.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@propensive@sgodbillon In Ruby, `new` is just a method of the `Foo` class, that's the beauty of the approach :-) -
@dohzya@sgodbillon Ah, I see - I was assuming a distinction between class and companion object in Scala.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.