3 ms·

I tried to get into scala, but the 2.8 release cycle instability was a brake for me. I trust that scala guys had to do what they did, but this kind of revoluti

by ithkuil 16y ago

I tried to get into scala, but the 2.8 release cycle instability was a brake for me. I trust that scala guys had to do what they did, but this kind of revolutions shouldn't happen too frequently, especially when the languages matures. still waiting for the porting of lift to 2.8 so that I can use lift and akka together. On the other hand, very fruitful experience with clojure. Even moving from 1.0, to 1.1 and now to 1.2.

cageface 16y ago
The changes have been a little painful but overall I think the Scala team is taking the right approach in fixing obvious design mistakes now while it's still possible to do so. As I'm getting more familiar with the new collections library I'm enjoying it a lot. I can write code that's as concise and expressive as Ruby but with the advantages of static type checking and much, much better performance.
- whakojacko 16y ago
  Yea, the new collections library is great once you can get used to it. I agree that now was a much better time to make big changes than further down the road
- j_baker 16y ago
  Yeah, but did they break backwards compatibility? If so, that isn't something I would expect in a .1 update when al language is at version 2.
  - jorgeortiz85 16y ago
    Scala does not follow the usual version number conventions. Scala 2 was a total re-write from Scala 1 (the compiler was ported from Java to Scala). Scala 2.8 is a major, backwards-incompatible release with Scala 2.7. Scala 2.8.x releases will be at least backwards source-compatible. (Binary compatibility is more challenging in Scala, because of how traits work, but the Scala team is allegedly tackling this problem for 2.8.1. We'll see.)
  - eeperson 16y ago
    They decided to make some backwards incompatible changes after they had already announced 2.8 as the next release. They would have made it 3.0 but everybody was already calling the next release 2.8.

by ithkuil 16y ago

cageface 16y ago

The changes have been a little painful but overall I think the Scala team is taking the right approach in fixing obvious design mistakes now while it's still possible to do so. As I'm getting more familiar with the new collections library I'm enjoying it a lot. I can write code that's as concise and expressive as Ruby but with the advantages of static type checking and much, much better performance.

whakojacko 16y ago
Yea, the new collections library is great once you can get used to it. I agree that now was a much better time to make big changes than further down the road
j_baker 16y ago
Yeah, but did they break backwards compatibility? If so, that isn't something I would expect in a .1 update when al language is at version 2.
- jorgeortiz85 16y ago
  Scala does not follow the usual version number conventions. Scala 2 was a total re-write from Scala 1 (the compiler was ported from Java to Scala). Scala 2.8 is a major, backwards-incompatible release with Scala 2.7. Scala 2.8.x releases will be at least backwards source-compatible. (Binary compatibility is more challenging in Scala, because of how traits work, but the Scala team is allegedly tackling this problem for 2.8.1. We'll see.)
- eeperson 16y ago
  They decided to make some backwards incompatible changes after they had already announced 2.8 as the next release. They would have made it 3.0 but everybody was already calling the next release 2.8.