For further consideration, round 2

[Greg Brown]

> I won't attempt to defend the collection literal proposal in  
> particular, but I will point out that different parts of a program  
> can stress different parts of your programming language.

I agree that it is ideal to keep language sprawl on any given project  
to a minimum. However, some languages are simply better suited to  
certain tasks than others. Why not take advantage of it? Isn't that  
one of the reasons for adding multi-language support to the JVM?

> It just isn't reasonable to switch among languages for different  
> parts of a project.


I would suggest that many (most?) real-world projects do switch  
between languages, and often. A typical web project may use HTML, CSS,  
JavaScript, Java, JSP, XML, SQL, etc. This isn't necessarily a good  
example of it, but I would say there is definitely an argument to be  
made for using "the right tool for the job".