> I’m personally very happy with my Python-like language with Python-like libraries, with static typing for maintainability, orders of magnitude better runtime

> I’m personally very happy with my Python-like language with Python-like libraries, with static typing for maintainability, orders of magnitude better runtime performance, excellent parallelism and concurrency, one of the best compile-to-JS experiences in the world, and the best tooling (IDEs, profilers, monitoring, etc.) on the market. Hey lihaoyi, completely agree with you on this. (Coming from someone who recently stopped writing scala). That said, in my opinion, if you got to write “python-like scala” with static typing and hof on a regular basis, you should count yourself as one of the lucky ones. In the context of a diverse team, with interests and experiences ranging from Java to Js to python To all the way to Idris, how would you reconcile how different team members want to write Scala? What I’ve seen this lead to is just because you understand one portion of the codebase, doesn’t mean you can understand another one (both on similar levels of domain complexity), and just because intellij works great on one module, doesn’t mean it’s going to work at all in another one. EDIT: and I have to say, I love your contributions to Scala library ecosystem, and have used many of them. :) they really do reflect the simplicity of python-like scala.