4 ms·
Scala has much worse tooling (SBT is an oxymoron), and it's much harder to read than Java. Conceding that it's more fun to write, I think 'harder to read' is m
by jbooth 14y ago
Scala has much worse tooling (SBT is an oxymoron), and it's much harder to read than Java.
Conceding that it's more fun to write, I think 'harder to read' is more important. Scaling refers to team size and amount of functionality in addition to requests per second.
- jspthrowaway2 14y agoIt's also the slowest compilation I've ever seen, even with really clever custom tooling.
- felipehummel 14y agoScala compilation is indeed slow (although I think C++ is worse). But I always have a "sbt ~compile" running, compiling every file as they change. So the compilation time is pretty much irrelevant to me. While using eclipse, I guess, you'd get the same speed too.
- felipehummel 14y agoThe "much harder to read" varies greatly between codebases. Most "sane" codebases are 90% (random percentage) as easy to read as Java. Just collection initialization, transformations, simple pattern-matching, method invocations... Some times there is an ugly nested flatMaps/maps/filters. But in my experience, in general, they're more the exception than the rule.