4 ms·

I find it incredibly ironic that they have called the company Typesafe when type-safety is something Scala definitely does not have.

CaptainLurk 15y ago
Say what? Scala is statically typed, and does some awesome type inference so that you don't have to declare your type every place you declare a variable. It may look dynamically typed, but its not (http://programming-scala.labs.oreilly.com/ch12.html http://programming-scala.labs.oreilly.com/ch12.html).
- typesafety 15y ago
  There are numerous holes in the type system. Just browse their bug tracker to see. And several of them are not just "bugs" but deep flaws in the type system.
  - jordibunster 15y ago
    Please point to a few.
    - typesafety 15y ago
      https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/963 https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/963 https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/2856 https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/2856 among others
      - jjm 15y ago
        Hm... As an early Scala/Akka developer, and contributor I would like to see these issues addressed by the team because I'm seeing a lot of trac jacking going on. This usually only happens when there isn't a response to issues.
      - cmkrnl 15y ago
        Are you of the opinion that the problems with the Scala type system are unfixable?
        typesafety 15y ago
        I would like them to be fixable, because otherwise Scala is a decent language, but it is too early to say.
      - smcj 15y ago
        Hi Tony, isn't #963 more or less fixed? (It crashes the compiler, but doesn't fail at runtime anymore ...) Could you post a new example of it if it isn't?
        shasta 15y ago
        Isn't crashing the compiler pretty far to the "less" side of "more or less fixed"?
        smcj 15y ago
        Failure to compile is always better than generating wrong bytecode.
        shasta 15y ago
        Right, but I don't think "fixed: replaced with compiler crash" is a resolution you'll see in many bug databases
  - kikibobo69 15y ago
    I think the key thing is that there is no mechanism to be sure that messages you send to actors are immutable. There is a compiler plugin in development to help, though.
    - typesafety 15y ago
      That's really a different issue than type safety.
      - kikibobo69 15y ago
        Indeed, you are right...
    - gtani 15y ago
      http://www.slideshare.net/jboner/akka-talk-at-geneva-jug-scala-api http://www.slideshare.net/jboner/akka-talk-at-geneva-jug-sca... slide 34: immutable msgs , typed actors
  - KirinDave 15y ago
    The same could be argued of Haskell and many ML derivatives. Do you think this is particularly clever to point out?
    - typesafety 15y ago
      So I'm curious, can you point to known problems with Haskell or ML that do not involve using the unsafe features? Scala has problems even without resorting to "unsafe" features like casting or native methods.
      - swannodette 15y ago
        GHC 7 recently broken with the traditional ML type checking / inference mechanism because it's not expressive enough for the kind of the code that Haskell wants to support. Noone has this stuff figured out, certainly not ML, Haskell, or Scala. Benjamin C Pierce has even written about how some domains are positively painful w/ strong type systems and how contracts are a more expressive solution. I'd like to see the ideas behind the Art of the Metaobject Protocol applied to type systems. Allow users to selectively fill those holes that relevant for their domain.
        typesafety 15y ago
        I don't see any mention of a specific safety problems. Plus, I am given to believe that there are actually numerous papers on the extensions involved in the Haskell type system. Consider http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Simonpj/Talk:OutsideIn http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Simonpj/Talk:OutsideIn
        swannodette 15y ago
        That is the paper I'm referring to. Type safety is an arms race with expressiveness and the paper pretty much says so. REPLY: You're argument is reductive to the point of being useless - i.e. you could write a type checker for a domain of programs so small as to be comical. type safety and the domain of the provable programs are inextricably intertwined.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
shasta 15y ago
Incredibly ironic? It sounds like you've found a couple of bugs. What's with the throw away hatchet account?
- typesafety 15y ago
  I didn't find these bugs, they're just ones that have been accumulating over the years. If all of these were as simple as being "bugs" rather than flaws in the type system why wouldn't they have been fixed by now? Is there something wrong with trying to encourage them to fix these problems and make Scala all the better for it?
harryh 15y ago
Tony? This has got to be Tony....
- KirinDave 15y ago
  I laughed. Hard.
- typesafety 15y ago
  Good one.
- gtani 15y ago
  the meme http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1592132 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1592132
- CodeMage 15y ago
  Sorry, I don't get it. Can you explain the joke (even if it kills it)?
- foobarbazetc 15y ago
  Hehehehehe.

CaptainLurk 15y ago

Say what? Scala is statically typed, and does some awesome type inference so that you don't have to declare your type every place you declare a variable. It may look dynamically typed, but its not (http://programming-scala.labs.oreilly.com/ch12.html http://programming-scala.labs.oreilly.com/ch12.html).

typesafety 15y ago
There are numerous holes in the type system. Just browse their bug tracker to see. And several of them are not just "bugs" but deep flaws in the type system.
- jordibunster 15y ago
  Please point to a few.
  - typesafety 15y ago
    https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/963 https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/963 https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/2856 https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/ticket/2856 among others
    - jjm 15y ago
      Hm... As an early Scala/Akka developer, and contributor I would like to see these issues addressed by the team because I'm seeing a lot of trac jacking going on. This usually only happens when there isn't a response to issues.
    - cmkrnl 15y ago
      Are you of the opinion that the problems with the Scala type system are unfixable?
      - typesafety 15y ago
        I would like them to be fixable, because otherwise Scala is a decent language, but it is too early to say.
    - smcj 15y ago
      Hi Tony, isn't #963 more or less fixed? (It crashes the compiler, but doesn't fail at runtime anymore ...) Could you post a new example of it if it isn't?
      - shasta 15y ago
        Isn't crashing the compiler pretty far to the "less" side of "more or less fixed"?
        smcj 15y ago
        Failure to compile is always better than generating wrong bytecode.
        shasta 15y ago
        Right, but I don't think "fixed: replaced with compiler crash" is a resolution you'll see in many bug databases
- kikibobo69 15y ago
  I think the key thing is that there is no mechanism to be sure that messages you send to actors are immutable. There is a compiler plugin in development to help, though.
  - typesafety 15y ago
    That's really a different issue than type safety.
    - kikibobo69 15y ago
      Indeed, you are right...
  - gtani 15y ago
    http://www.slideshare.net/jboner/akka-talk-at-geneva-jug-scala-api http://www.slideshare.net/jboner/akka-talk-at-geneva-jug-sca... slide 34: immutable msgs , typed actors
- KirinDave 15y ago
  The same could be argued of Haskell and many ML derivatives. Do you think this is particularly clever to point out?
  - typesafety 15y ago
    So I'm curious, can you point to known problems with Haskell or ML that do not involve using the unsafe features? Scala has problems even without resorting to "unsafe" features like casting or native methods.
    - swannodette 15y ago
      GHC 7 recently broken with the traditional ML type checking / inference mechanism because it's not expressive enough for the kind of the code that Haskell wants to support. Noone has this stuff figured out, certainly not ML, Haskell, or Scala. Benjamin C Pierce has even written about how some domains are positively painful w/ strong type systems and how contracts are a more expressive solution. I'd like to see the ideas behind the Art of the Metaobject Protocol applied to type systems. Allow users to selectively fill those holes that relevant for their domain.
      - typesafety 15y ago
        I don't see any mention of a specific safety problems. Plus, I am given to believe that there are actually numerous papers on the extensions involved in the Haskell type system. Consider http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Simonpj/Talk:OutsideIn http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Simonpj/Talk:OutsideIn
        swannodette 15y ago
        That is the paper I'm referring to. Type safety is an arms race with expressiveness and the paper pretty much says so. REPLY: You're argument is reductive to the point of being useless - i.e. you could write a type checker for a domain of programs so small as to be comical. type safety and the domain of the provable programs are inextricably intertwined.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

shasta 15y ago

Incredibly ironic? It sounds like you've found a couple of bugs. What's with the throw away hatchet account?

typesafety 15y ago
I didn't find these bugs, they're just ones that have been accumulating over the years. If all of these were as simple as being "bugs" rather than flaws in the type system why wouldn't they have been fixed by now? Is there something wrong with trying to encourage them to fix these problems and make Scala all the better for it?

harryh 15y ago

Tony? This has got to be Tony....

KirinDave 15y ago
I laughed. Hard.
typesafety 15y ago
Good one.
gtani 15y ago
the meme http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1592132 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1592132
CodeMage 15y ago
Sorry, I don't get it. Can you explain the joke (even if it kills it)?
foobarbazetc 15y ago
Hehehehehe.