6 ms·

The "ew gross weird" reaction to Scala and Clojure is tremendously disappointing (especially coming from someone whose thesis is basically "give this new langua

by pje 9y ago

The "ew gross weird" reaction to Scala and Clojure is tremendously disappointing (especially coming from someone whose thesis is basically "give this new language a chance")

icedchai 9y ago
I worked on a commercial project that used Scala. Never again. Compiles were slow, IDE support was terrible, everyone had their own subset they used. I'm sure it's improved since 2010.
- dzdt 9y ago
  Two million line scala codebase -> 2 hour clean and rebuild with a top of the line workstation. IDE support has improved, compile times not so much.
  - lmm 9y ago
    Agreed as far as it goes. But can one person really understand a 2 million line codebase? Can a team large enough to use a 2 million line codebase stay in close enough communication that they all know what each other are doing? IME to stay sane on a codebase that large you need separated components with strict separation between interface and implementation and independent versioning of each, at which point you might as well make that split at the module/VCS level and take advantage of what your tools can do for you.
- partycoder 9y ago
  I think it has changed for good. There are also initiatives to simplify Scala (e.g: dotty), and initiatives to go native (e.g: Scala native via LLVM). I think Scala has some good potential.
- runT1ME 9y ago
  I work on a large Scala team. We use microservices so my regular compile times are somewhere between 4s and 20s. I rarely have to do a full rebuild. IDE support is bad, that's a good criticism but a good chunk of us don't use IDEs, and instead write it like a dynamic language. Live inside the REPL, copy paste back and fourth. As for 'subsets' everyone uses, I find this advantageous. Our team strongly encourages a pure functional style, but we realize not everyone is going to start out that way, and it doesn't get in the way of shipping software.
  - thr0waway1239 9y ago
    You might have actually convinced people to not consider Scala. You are saying, Scala is great, except for these small things: 1. Modify your codebase to use microservices 2. Modify your IDE habits to be more REPL friendly 3. Modify your team coding habits even if it makes it hard for one person to work on the other person's codebase.
    - runT1ME 9y ago
      I work with some larger Scala codebases too and the compile times are not that bad either. Maybe 30 seconds is more common for the large ones. Certainly not worse than C++, only a bit slower than Java. >2. Modify your IDE habits to be more REPL friendly Plenty of people use IDEs, I just think if that's what your main sticking point when picking a language, go with C#. It has the best IDE of any language. >3. Modify your team coding habits even if it makes it hard for one person to work on the other person's codebase. Nope, not a problem. I can work on any code base in the company. It's spooky how fast we can jump into others teams projects and contribute, and a lot of that is due to the power of the language.
    - whateveracct 9y ago
      But the thing is if you modify your habits, it's so much more efficient than most other languages. It's reasonable to have to learn knew coding style when paradigm-shifting languages. Why isn't it reasonable for there to be other new behaviors as well?
      - mateuszf 9y ago
        Because there are other languages, which also provide the benefits, but without these downsides.
        boubiyeah 9y ago
        Which ones?
        whateveracct 9y ago
zzalpha 9y ago
Clojure startup times are brutal, and simply not workable in the mobile environment where Android lives.
- retrogradeorbit 9y ago
  https://github.com/drapanjanas/re-natal https://github.com/drapanjanas/re-natal
- iLemming 9y ago
  You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Clojure allows you live interactive programming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt2zNemLCCk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt2zNemLCCk
gavinpc 9y ago
He was initially excited about Clojure, as a Lisp enthusiast, but as I recall he had a clash with the community about the direction of the language. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure/JiK-WLFT65M/spBka_gsPcQJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure/JiK-WLFT65M/spBka_gs...
- dmix 9y ago
  More context here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2466731 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2466731 With replies directly from Rich Hickey regarding Steve Yegge's "yes language". Steve is certainly no stranger to Clojure. Edit: also of interest in the discussion, Clojure is now #50 on TIOBE's top 50 list of languages. Notably OCAML didn't break #50 (or Common Lisp). I don't put much value in those lists personally but it does have economic value.
  - gavinpc 9y ago
    Thanks, that's the one I was looking for.

by pje 9y ago

The "ew gross weird" reaction to Scala and Clojure is tremendously disappointing (especially coming from someone whose thesis is basically "give this new language a chance")

icedchai 9y ago

I worked on a commercial project that used Scala. Never again. Compiles were slow, IDE support was terrible, everyone had their own subset they used. I'm sure it's improved since 2010.

dzdt 9y ago
Two million line scala codebase -> 2 hour clean and rebuild with a top of the line workstation. IDE support has improved, compile times not so much.
- lmm 9y ago
  Agreed as far as it goes. But can one person really understand a 2 million line codebase? Can a team large enough to use a 2 million line codebase stay in close enough communication that they all know what each other are doing? IME to stay sane on a codebase that large you need separated components with strict separation between interface and implementation and independent versioning of each, at which point you might as well make that split at the module/VCS level and take advantage of what your tools can do for you.
partycoder 9y ago
I think it has changed for good. There are also initiatives to simplify Scala (e.g: dotty), and initiatives to go native (e.g: Scala native via LLVM). I think Scala has some good potential.
runT1ME 9y ago
I work on a large Scala team. We use microservices so my regular compile times are somewhere between 4s and 20s. I rarely have to do a full rebuild. IDE support is bad, that's a good criticism but a good chunk of us don't use IDEs, and instead write it like a dynamic language. Live inside the REPL, copy paste back and fourth. As for 'subsets' everyone uses, I find this advantageous. Our team strongly encourages a pure functional style, but we realize not everyone is going to start out that way, and it doesn't get in the way of shipping software.
- thr0waway1239 9y ago
  You might have actually convinced people to not consider Scala. You are saying, Scala is great, except for these small things: 1. Modify your codebase to use microservices 2. Modify your IDE habits to be more REPL friendly 3. Modify your team coding habits even if it makes it hard for one person to work on the other person's codebase.
  - runT1ME 9y ago
    I work with some larger Scala codebases too and the compile times are not that bad either. Maybe 30 seconds is more common for the large ones. Certainly not worse than C++, only a bit slower than Java. >2. Modify your IDE habits to be more REPL friendly Plenty of people use IDEs, I just think if that's what your main sticking point when picking a language, go with C#. It has the best IDE of any language. >3. Modify your team coding habits even if it makes it hard for one person to work on the other person's codebase. Nope, not a problem. I can work on any code base in the company. It's spooky how fast we can jump into others teams projects and contribute, and a lot of that is due to the power of the language.
  - whateveracct 9y ago
    But the thing is if you modify your habits, it's so much more efficient than most other languages. It's reasonable to have to learn knew coding style when paradigm-shifting languages. Why isn't it reasonable for there to be other new behaviors as well?
    - mateuszf 9y ago
      Because there are other languages, which also provide the benefits, but without these downsides.
      - boubiyeah 9y ago
        Which ones?
      - whateveracct 9y ago

zzalpha 9y ago

Clojure startup times are brutal, and simply not workable in the mobile environment where Android lives.

retrogradeorbit 9y ago
https://github.com/drapanjanas/re-natal https://github.com/drapanjanas/re-natal
iLemming 9y ago
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. Clojure allows you live interactive programming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt2zNemLCCk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dt2zNemLCCk

gavinpc 9y ago

He was initially excited about Clojure, as a Lisp enthusiast, but as I recall he had a clash with the community about the direction of the language. https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure/JiK-WLFT65M/spBka_gsPcQJ https://groups.google.com/d/msg/clojure/JiK-WLFT65M/spBka_gs...

dmix 9y ago
More context here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2466731 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2466731 With replies directly from Rich Hickey regarding Steve Yegge's "yes language". Steve is certainly no stranger to Clojure. Edit: also of interest in the discussion, Clojure is now #50 on TIOBE's top 50 list of languages. Notably OCAML didn't break #50 (or Common Lisp). I don't put much value in those lists personally but it does have economic value.
- gavinpc 9y ago
  Thanks, that's the one I was looking for.