4 ms·

There are plenty of people who use scala as an ML on the JVM, not as a worse Haskell. They just aren't as loud about it. If you're looking for an ML kind of e

by kod 9y ago

There are plenty of people who use scala as an ML on the JVM, not as a worse Haskell. They just aren't as loud about it. If you're looking for an ML kind of experience, Kotlin is a joke, it doesn't even have pattern matching.

suj1th 9y ago
>If you're looking for an ML kind of experience, Kotlin is a joke, it doesn't even have pattern matching. Can't agree with this more. I just cannot figure the raison d'être of Kotlin.
- s4vi0r 9y ago
  To me it seems sorta like reasonable Java. Tons of QoL upgrades that Java hasn't (or won't, due to compatibility issues) implemented over the years make it so that you can write Kotlin without absolutely having to rely on a massive IDE or something like project Lombok. They've got great tooling and a lot of support, and they've been adding in tons of great features (e.g inline classes/value classes coming soon). If I had to build a company today Kotlin would definitely be at the top of my list; I may love other languages much more, but Kotlin and C# are easily at the top of the developer experience imo, since they've got great tooling/ecosystem/support and both are very approachable/average languages that won't really scare anyone away like how Haskell might (despite it being one of the most underrated/most scare monegered/most misunderstood languages out there imo)
s4vi0r 9y ago
Would you care to explain more about your style? It sounds like a nice compromise, and the lack of pattern matching and HKTs in kotlin is definitely a bit of a pain point after having gotten so used to Scala and Haskell. ML on the JVM seems like a nice niche for it, but I'm not sure I really have seen libraries or Scala devs sorta advertise their style/library as ML inspired. I've seen OCaml mentioned as an inspiration to Scala before, but there are some notable differences between the two (e.g. inheritance vs structural typing)
- kod 9y ago
  I don't agree with everything suggested here, but this is similar to what I'm talking about http://www.lihaoyi.com/post/StrategicScalaStylePrincipleofLeastPower.html http://www.lihaoyi.com/post/StrategicScalaStylePrincipleofLe... especially the reasoning that you should try to avoid mutability, but when something is mutable, just make it mutable. This is much more in line with ML approach than with typical Haskell concerns around effects systems.

by kod 9y ago

suj1th 9y ago

>If you're looking for an ML kind of experience, Kotlin is a joke, it doesn't even have pattern matching. Can't agree with this more. I just cannot figure the raison d'être of Kotlin.

s4vi0r 9y ago
To me it seems sorta like reasonable Java. Tons of QoL upgrades that Java hasn't (or won't, due to compatibility issues) implemented over the years make it so that you can write Kotlin without absolutely having to rely on a massive IDE or something like project Lombok. They've got great tooling and a lot of support, and they've been adding in tons of great features (e.g inline classes/value classes coming soon). If I had to build a company today Kotlin would definitely be at the top of my list; I may love other languages much more, but Kotlin and C# are easily at the top of the developer experience imo, since they've got great tooling/ecosystem/support and both are very approachable/average languages that won't really scare anyone away like how Haskell might (despite it being one of the most underrated/most scare monegered/most misunderstood languages out there imo)

s4vi0r 9y ago

Would you care to explain more about your style? It sounds like a nice compromise, and the lack of pattern matching and HKTs in kotlin is definitely a bit of a pain point after having gotten so used to Scala and Haskell. ML on the JVM seems like a nice niche for it, but I'm not sure I really have seen libraries or Scala devs sorta advertise their style/library as ML inspired. I've seen OCaml mentioned as an inspiration to Scala before, but there are some notable differences between the two (e.g. inheritance vs structural typing)

kod 9y ago
I don't agree with everything suggested here, but this is similar to what I'm talking about http://www.lihaoyi.com/post/StrategicScalaStylePrincipleofLeastPower.html http://www.lihaoyi.com/post/StrategicScalaStylePrincipleofLe... especially the reasoning that you should try to avoid mutability, but when something is mutable, just make it mutable. This is much more in line with ML approach than with typical Haskell concerns around effects systems.