Cedric Buest responds to Next-gen Java Programming Style

> Functions are just goto in desguise.

Gosub, if one were to nitpick:)

Right, I think the point of the original article is that you can gain a lot by using the proper syntactic sugar.

Yes, when I read his critique of fluent interfaces I realized that he is just disagreeing with everything to be contrary. "fluent interfaces are setters in disguise. So, Stephan, which one is it?" - he is not actually critiquing the fluent interfaces, just nitpicking the inconsistency. Its usually a mistake to be overly concerned with consistency.

Yes you can come up with a case where every one of those guidelines are wrong, but I think that there are a lot of cases where they make sense.

As was pointed above, I'm not opposed to fluent interfaces and we use quite a few at my work (Google).

I was just observing that you can't argue against mutators and then encourage people to use fluent interfaces since they are basically the same thing.