3 ms·

The main difference is that Scala.js people sat down and did all the painstaking work, while Haskell devs spent the time talking how intellectually superior the

The main difference is that Scala.js people sat down and did all the painstaking work, while Haskell devs spent the time talking how intellectually superior the are and got nothing done.

codygman 10y ago
> Haskell devs spent the time talking how intellectually superior the are and got nothing done. I could give a recap of Haskell development that's happened while Scala.js has been developed to debunk this silly accusation, but it wouldn't change your mind.
- premium-concern 10y ago
  Well, Scala.js went from not existing to rock solid in 3 years. The various Haskell-to-JS efforts existed much longer, but none have the support, completeness and maturity of Scala.js.
  - willtim 10y ago
    That is down to who has the most funding. Javascript itself has even more "support, completeness and maturity" than Scalajs. But obviously that's not the deciding factor.
    - premium-concern 10y ago
      Scala.js was largely done by a single student on top of his other university duties. I think it's mostly down to determination. Some things are hard, but need to be done. Haskell people just seem to give up more easily - see all the half-working projects. Nobody finishes stuff, the next dev just starts his own new project, and abandons it later. Scala.js handily beats JavaScript in terms of IDE support and tooling
      - willtim 10y ago
        A quick Google suggests Scalajs has had developers paid to work on it (EPFL lab and Lightbend): http://scala-lang.org/blog/2016/03/14/announcing-the-scala-center.html http://scala-lang.org/blog/2016/03/14/announcing-the-scala-c... The Haskell community has achieved great things even though most contributions are done in people's spare time. That is determination.
        premium-concern 10y ago
        That's nonsense. I think it's great that outside contributions (like allowing the use of the Scala's CI infrastructure) are valued, but the actual commits show a clear picture. There is no determination in failing to get anything done and doing NIH for a decade.

The main difference is that Scala.js people sat down and did all the painstaking work, while Haskell devs spent the time talking how intellectually superior the are and got nothing done.

codygman 10y ago

> Haskell devs spent the time talking how intellectually superior the are and got nothing done. I could give a recap of Haskell development that's happened while Scala.js has been developed to debunk this silly accusation, but it wouldn't change your mind.

premium-concern 10y ago
Well, Scala.js went from not existing to rock solid in 3 years. The various Haskell-to-JS efforts existed much longer, but none have the support, completeness and maturity of Scala.js.
- willtim 10y ago
  That is down to who has the most funding. Javascript itself has even more "support, completeness and maturity" than Scalajs. But obviously that's not the deciding factor.
  - premium-concern 10y ago
    Scala.js was largely done by a single student on top of his other university duties. I think it's mostly down to determination. Some things are hard, but need to be done. Haskell people just seem to give up more easily - see all the half-working projects. Nobody finishes stuff, the next dev just starts his own new project, and abandons it later. Scala.js handily beats JavaScript in terms of IDE support and tooling
    - willtim 10y ago
      A quick Google suggests Scalajs has had developers paid to work on it (EPFL lab and Lightbend): http://scala-lang.org/blog/2016/03/14/announcing-the-scala-center.html http://scala-lang.org/blog/2016/03/14/announcing-the-scala-c... The Haskell community has achieved great things even though most contributions are done in people's spare time. That is determination.
      - premium-concern 10y ago
        That's nonsense. I think it's great that outside contributions (like allowing the use of the Scala's CI infrastructure) are valued, but the actual commits show a clear picture. There is no determination in failing to get anything done and doing NIH for a decade.