4 ms·

I don't keep up with Scala and Clojure that much since I am not a JVM guy but I was always under the impression that Scala being older has ALWAYS had a lead on

I don't keep up with Scala and Clojure that much since I am not a JVM guy but I was always under the impression that Scala being older has ALWAYS had a lead on Clojure. However the Scala hype seems to have died down years ago while you see more enthusiasm around Clojure. > I tried 3 times to learn functional programming by learning Haskell and it never clicked. LISP (Racket) and Julia helped me most with functional programming. For Haskell type of functional programming I think Swift actually helped me most. But I find many of the same problems with Swift as with Haskell. Understanding type mistakes can be really hard. You struggle much longer with figuring out type problems than you would in a dynamic language. I think advocates of these super statically typed languages completely overestimate the complexity the average human mind is capable of dealing with. Perhaps because the creators are super smart themselves ;-)

Random_ernest 7y ago
> I think advocates of these super statically typed languages completely overestimate the complexity the average human mind is capable of dealing with. Perhaps because the creators are super smart themselves ;-) That is a really good point. From my personal pov languages that take to long to understand and take you >1 week to get productive are rarely useful since you won't be able to afford or train "normal" people to use it. In my company we recently switched from Python + Numba to Python and Clojure. Since even though people never heard of functional programming or Clojure, they can get started on simple things within the first week.