3 ms·

I don't really understand all those complaints. I am using it professionally since 8 month and I only had problems the first two month, then I felt good, even i

by gbersac 10y ago

I don't really understand all those complaints. I am using it professionally since 8 month and I only had problems the first two month, then I felt good, even if there is always something else to learn. For the complexity problem, here is how I manage it : the functional programming scala is scala, everything else is garbage included for java compatibility. It works like a charm. I can't think of a language I could feel better with.

the_af 10y ago
Mostly agreed. There are some pains associated with Scala, though. Sometimes self-inflicted by people who want it to be like Java: for example, most ORMs for Scala suck. A team at my office tried to use Hibernate to disastrous effects (Scala and Hibernate's hostile takeover of collections don't play well). Even some DSLs like Scalike tend to also be painful and unwieldy. I also dislike Play and its multitude of quirks and incompatible versions. It used to also be the case that both Eclipse (ScalaIDE) and IntelliJ IDEA were almost unusable with Scala, in particular constantly resulting in spurious compilation errors. I've no idea if Eclipse got better -- completely got rid of it after decades of using it with Java -- but IntelliJ did get better and mostly works (though it still cannot always compile Scalike DSLs). But even with all of the above, when I have to work with Java code again I cringe. Even with all the pain, Scala is simply better to work with for new code.
- cutler 10y ago
  Ever asked yourself why it's taken so long for Scala IDEs to be minimally useful? The complexity of the language makes it difficult to optimise compilation and the language is still suffering. Paul Phillips left Scala because of this and he said it was impossible to rectify without re-inventing the language. This shaky complexity is why I refuse to build valuable projects with Scala.
  - virtualwhys 10y ago
    and yet Paul Phillips still, to this day, writes Scala. Think about that, he's one of Scala's biggest critics; still Scala all day, everyday. There's nothing "shaky" about Scala's complexity, it's quite stable, and not going anywhere until Dotty lands circa 2020. Despite everything (slow compiler, average tooling, implicit/operator overloaded "magic" code bases, etc.) Scala will draw library creators (like those behind Spark, Kafka, Akka, Play, etc.) which in turn draws developers, resulting in the thriving ecosystem backing the language. Scala will live on despite itself; the ecosystem is what will carry the language to the Dotty land and beyond.
    - furrydog 10y ago
      True. Scala jobs growth is still very healthy too: https://www.indeed.com/jobtrends/q-scala.html https://www.indeed.com/jobtrends/q-scala.html
  - the_af 10y ago
    I don't think it was really about Scala's complexity (or it wasn't the main reason, at least), for multiple reasons: First, IntelliJ is quite decent nowadays. So it's demonstrably possible to build a decent IDE for Scala. Second, Eclipse itself has imploded in my opinion. Eclipse used to be a usable and reasonably fast IDE. Then, some years ago, there was noticeable increase in bloat and a downgraded performance for Java. I remember reading some major release of Eclipse, which required a refactor of its UI, didn't have any automated tests because the refactor broke them and there was a lack of volunteers willing to fix the tests. Nowadays I've stopped using Eclipse even for Java, because I cannot stand its slowness and random freezing/crashes.
hnbroseph 10y ago
it's always good to pat ourselves on the back!
mcguire 10y ago
Last time I liked at Scala, it's ecosystem seemed to be a large number of embedded DSLs that didn't play well with each other. Has that changed?
SatvikBeri 10y ago
Yeah, developing in Scala is great. My whole team (including me) had never used Scala before, we set up a weekly study group, had no problems becoming productive in the language in a few weeks. I understand that not everyone has this experience, and would love to see more/better tutorials for Scala come out, but I've definitely seen several people pick it up without any problems.

by gbersac 10y ago

the_af 10y ago

Mostly agreed. There are some pains associated with Scala, though. Sometimes self-inflicted by people who want it to be like Java: for example, most ORMs for Scala suck. A team at my office tried to use Hibernate to disastrous effects (Scala and Hibernate's hostile takeover of collections don't play well). Even some DSLs like Scalike tend to also be painful and unwieldy. I also dislike Play and its multitude of quirks and incompatible versions. It used to also be the case that both Eclipse (ScalaIDE) and IntelliJ IDEA were almost unusable with Scala, in particular constantly resulting in spurious compilation errors. I've no idea if Eclipse got better -- completely got rid of it after decades of using it with Java -- but IntelliJ did get better and mostly works (though it still cannot always compile Scalike DSLs). But even with all of the above, when I have to work with Java code again I cringe. Even with all the pain, Scala is simply better to work with for new code.

cutler 10y ago
Ever asked yourself why it's taken so long for Scala IDEs to be minimally useful? The complexity of the language makes it difficult to optimise compilation and the language is still suffering. Paul Phillips left Scala because of this and he said it was impossible to rectify without re-inventing the language. This shaky complexity is why I refuse to build valuable projects with Scala.
- virtualwhys 10y ago
  and yet Paul Phillips still, to this day, writes Scala. Think about that, he's one of Scala's biggest critics; still Scala all day, everyday. There's nothing "shaky" about Scala's complexity, it's quite stable, and not going anywhere until Dotty lands circa 2020. Despite everything (slow compiler, average tooling, implicit/operator overloaded "magic" code bases, etc.) Scala will draw library creators (like those behind Spark, Kafka, Akka, Play, etc.) which in turn draws developers, resulting in the thriving ecosystem backing the language. Scala will live on despite itself; the ecosystem is what will carry the language to the Dotty land and beyond.
  - furrydog 10y ago
    True. Scala jobs growth is still very healthy too: https://www.indeed.com/jobtrends/q-scala.html https://www.indeed.com/jobtrends/q-scala.html
- the_af 10y ago
  I don't think it was really about Scala's complexity (or it wasn't the main reason, at least), for multiple reasons: First, IntelliJ is quite decent nowadays. So it's demonstrably possible to build a decent IDE for Scala. Second, Eclipse itself has imploded in my opinion. Eclipse used to be a usable and reasonably fast IDE. Then, some years ago, there was noticeable increase in bloat and a downgraded performance for Java. I remember reading some major release of Eclipse, which required a refactor of its UI, didn't have any automated tests because the refactor broke them and there was a lack of volunteers willing to fix the tests. Nowadays I've stopped using Eclipse even for Java, because I cannot stand its slowness and random freezing/crashes.

hnbroseph 10y ago

it's always good to pat ourselves on the back!

mcguire 10y ago

Last time I liked at Scala, it's ecosystem seemed to be a large number of embedded DSLs that didn't play well with each other. Has that changed?

SatvikBeri 10y ago

Yeah, developing in Scala is great. My whole team (including me) had never used Scala before, we set up a weekly study group, had no problems becoming productive in the language in a few weeks. I understand that not everyone has this experience, and would love to see more/better tutorials for Scala come out, but I've definitely seen several people pick it up without any problems.