4 ms·
If by low development overhead you mean amount of crap you need to type in order to get things done, Scala absolutely does have low development overhead. As fo
by kod 10y ago
If by low development overhead you mean amount of crap you need to type in order to get things done, Scala absolutely does have low development overhead.
As for Go, I'd say that's the most honest description of the language I've seen in a while.
- lauriswtf 10y ago"Low development overhead" was taken from parent comment, but I understood that it means how productive and fast it is to write code/develop something in Scala.
- placeybordeaux 10y agoIf your limiting factor is how fast you can type you are either an amazing person that should be studied or you need to take a typing class.
- PeCaN 10y agoI suppose "amount of crap you have to type" means "low boilerplate", not "basically APL". Scala is pretty good in the low boilerplate department. I'm not a fan of Scala in the slightest, but in terms of code more or less directly expressing ideas it isn't bad.
- lmm 10y agoMy limiting factor is usually how fast I can comprehend other people's code, and the extraneous crap some languages require can often be the biggest contributor to that.