While it may have become cultural, the design-pattern mess is directly related to the limitations of Java the language when applied in its typical domains of application. The reason many languages whose features evolved in light of the Java design pattern mess don't share that mess isn't purely cultural, it is because the features of those languages were designed specifically (often drawing from older languages that didn't have the same problems as Java but which weren't popular in Java's role for other reasons) to overcome the limitations that require those patterns in Java; this is perhaps nowhere as obviously the case as it is with Scala.
> While it may have become cultural, the design-pattern mess is directly related to the limitations of Java the language when applied in its typical domains of application.
Totally agreed, I definitely elided some stuff there. They definitely exist to get around limitations in Java's expressiveness, and I cringe every time I end up writing them (day job is Android, and Scala there is iffy at best).
While it may have become cultural, the design-pattern mess is directly related to the limitations of Java the language when applied in its typical domains of application. The reason many languages whose features evolved in light of the Java design pattern mess don't share that mess isn't purely cultural, it is because the features of those languages were designed specifically (often drawing from older languages that didn't have the same problems as Java but which weren't popular in Java's role for other reasons) to overcome the limitations that require those patterns in Java; this is perhaps nowhere as obviously the case as it is with Scala.