4 ms·
Scala can be a fine Java replacement, if you drop 20% of its features on the floor. As long as you never see a higher-kinded type, I think you are ahead of Kotl
by hibikir 10y ago
Scala can be a fine Java replacement, if you drop 20% of its features on the floor. As long as you never see a higher-kinded type, I think you are ahead of Kotlin, and the learning curve is not really any different.
The problem with this approach is that 90% of Scala libraries are built by people that live in higher-kinded land, and believe that since they have reached that level of expertise, so should everyone else, the second they start learning the language. For instance, look at SummingBird: The hello world example includes F bounded polymorphism, and path dependent types! Anyone new to the language would run away screaming, and I'd not blame them.
- jkot 10y agoScala compatibility is not so great. It has its own collections and other libraries. And it does not even support java getters and setters.
- premium-concern 10y agoWhy would you create a new language and then keep a huge part of what developers interact with on a daily basis in such a broken shape as in Java? (Or rack up a massive amount of complexity and break your typesystem by trying to put lipstick on the Java collection pig? (Kotlin).)
- jkot 10y ago1 billion lines of code, that is why.