4 ms·
Scala is slow to compile. This was exasperated for me by the fact that I had just finished spending 2 weeks working in Go (which compiles stupendously fast) bef
by latch 15y ago
Scala is slow to compile. This was exasperated for me by the fact that I had just finished spending 2 weeks working in Go (which compiles stupendously fast) before trying scala.
I don't understand people who can put themselves through that much pain. FSC doesn't come close to addressing it well enough. I think anyone who's used to the compile-free nature of dynamic languages is going to have a hard time with Scala until it's resolved.
- riobard 15y agoCompiling speed is slightly improved in Scala 2.9. Using sbt will reduce the time too. It's not as fast as Go, though.
- noelwelsh 15y agoYou make your choice and pay your price. Want a great type system? What code that runs really fast? Haskell and Scala are the only two choices that really fit the bill.
- profquail 15y agoThere are a number of other languages that fit the bill: F#, OCaml, and ATS, for starters. Shen (the newest version of Qi) was released last week so there's that too, if you're into Lisp.
- dxbydt 15y agoIn the enterprise, there are no other languages that fit the bill besides Scala. You underestimate just how much java code exists out there in any commercial bank, IB, big corp., yada yada. Its an order of magnitude more than your wildest imagination. Sad, but true. Now, how are you going to migrate all of that to Scala ? Easy - just do nothing for the legacy non-buggy stuff, write any new functionality in scala, and continue bugfixing legacy buggy java code in java. That's the only alternative. Not migrating to scala is gradually becoming a non-option. Too many advantages over java to even begin listing at this point. Now if you are an MS shop, its a different story. And ofcourse none of this applies to startups, who can use pretty much whatever they want.
- gaius 15y agoAnd OCaml (which compiles fast) and F#.
- lylejohnson 15y agoexacerbated