5 ms·

Scala looks complex on paper, but my experience has been that in practice it's not that bad. If you're designing a library you need to think hard about types bu

Scala looks complex on paper, but my experience has been that in practice it's not that bad. If you're designing a library you need to think hard about types but you can put together an app very quickly in Scala and with a lot fewer initial bugs than in a dynamically typed language.

jshen 15y ago
I wonder if there is value in making it easy to make library? I feel like the ruby eco system gains a lot for the rate at which people can try out ideas for libraries.
- cageface 15y ago
  Scala forces you to consider your library interface more carefully. This makes it more work to build a library but I think it pays off in a cleaner, more consistent and self-documenting library. Scala makes you think a little harder in general but, in my experience, you also write better code. All that painful refactoring and modularization that went into Rails 3 would have been a lot easier and, I suspect, less necessary if Rails had been written in Scala.
  - jshen 15y ago
    I think of it more in terms of natural selection. If, and this is a big if, diversity is greater in language x than in language y due to ease of trying ideas, then there is more opportunity to hit on good ideas.
    - cageface 15y ago
      The barrier to entry in Scala is definitely higher, and I do think this has limited its growth. To be honest, I don't think Scala is going to be the FP lang that really goes big, although I wish it were. I just hope Scala gets enough traction that I can find real work in the language. After using it for a while languages like Ruby and Python just feel primitive.
      - jshen 15y ago
        I hope any of them get enough traction that I don't have to fight to code in something other than java :)
carsongross 15y ago
You could say the same thing about C++ The reality is that complex features will be used and abused.
- cageface 15y ago
  You need a sharp edge to cut the meat. In practice I find coding in Scala much easier than coding in C++.

jshen 15y ago

I wonder if there is value in making it easy to make library? I feel like the ruby eco system gains a lot for the rate at which people can try out ideas for libraries.

cageface 15y ago
Scala forces you to consider your library interface more carefully. This makes it more work to build a library but I think it pays off in a cleaner, more consistent and self-documenting library. Scala makes you think a little harder in general but, in my experience, you also write better code. All that painful refactoring and modularization that went into Rails 3 would have been a lot easier and, I suspect, less necessary if Rails had been written in Scala.
- jshen 15y ago
  I think of it more in terms of natural selection. If, and this is a big if, diversity is greater in language x than in language y due to ease of trying ideas, then there is more opportunity to hit on good ideas.
  - cageface 15y ago
    The barrier to entry in Scala is definitely higher, and I do think this has limited its growth. To be honest, I don't think Scala is going to be the FP lang that really goes big, although I wish it were. I just hope Scala gets enough traction that I can find real work in the language. After using it for a while languages like Ruby and Python just feel primitive.
    - jshen 15y ago
      I hope any of them get enough traction that I don't have to fight to code in something other than java :)

carsongross 15y ago

You could say the same thing about C++ The reality is that complex features will be used and abused.

cageface 15y ago
You need a sharp edge to cut the meat. In practice I find coding in Scala much easier than coding in C++.