3 ms·

- Type erasure - true but it results in a very small increase in overall verbosity. - Null - true but Scala's approach is perhaps more verbose than Java's. I l

- Type erasure - true but it results in a very small increase in overall verbosity. - Null - true but Scala's approach is perhaps more verbose than Java's. I like Groovy's approach the most (). - Functional if - definitely disagree that it makes tons of code simpler / easier to read. - Java 8 has traits (but I'm not sure if they're equivalent to Scala's traits). - Nonfunctional core API's – Guava helps here. – Reference-reseating-by-default - don't know what you mean by that. I don't think Scala is the next Java. Personally, I wish Kotlin, Ceylon or Dart would replace Java. Scala makes the wrong expressivness / simplicity tradeoff. > outside of the epistemic closure of the Java world it is rapidly becoming understood that Java is better at nothing by design Not true. Yammer moved back from Scala to Java: http://blog.joda.org/2011/11/real-life-scala-feedback-from-yammer.html http://blog.joda.org/2011/11/real-life-scala-feedback-from-y...

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
eropple 13y ago
Yammer did no such thing (and it's telling that you're sourcing a two-year-old article that misrepresents the situation under discussion): http://eng.yammer.com/scala-at-yammer/ http://eng.yammer.com/scala-at-yammer/ And Scala isn't the next Java. Frankly, it isn't simple enough to appeal to people who have become comfortable; it isn't unchallenging enough to supplant Java. This is not a demerit.
- RivieraKid 13y ago
  Right now at Yammer we're moving our basic infrastructure stack over to Java, and keeping Scala support around in the form of façades and legacy libraries. The link you provided doesn't contradict that. Language can be too simple or too complex. The tradeoff that gives maximum productivity is somewhere in the middle. And in my opinion, languages like Dart or Ceylon are much closer to the optimum than Scala.
  - eropple 13y ago
    I don't think you've done anything to substantiate the claim that it's "too complex"; forgive my skepticism but I've spent enough time in both the Scala and C++ communities to draw a significant line between "too complex" and "critic hasn't learned it sufficiently" (and I've been on both sides of that line). I have spent a nontrivial amount of time with Kotlin and Ceylon and neither are particularly interesting to me after actually internalizing and understanding Scala; as an example, I am significantly hampered by their continued insistence on mutable-everywhere (which is basically the watchword for "barely adequate programmer"). They may very well be "the next Java", but that's a curse more than a compliment. You should not need Guava to write minimally competent code. Meanwhile, as a sibling comment notes, Twitter's a lot bigger than Yammer and pretty vocal about going whole-hog on Scala (and I've talked to them a little about what they've done, it's insanely impressive, I'm jealous). Guess they're just making things hard on themselves for no reason though.
    - RivieraKid 13y ago
      Linus Torvalds is in the C++ is too complex camp too AFAIK :) I believe that Ceylon is the best-designed general purpose language out there. What do you mean by "mutable-everywhere"? Ceylon's variables / attributes are immutable by default.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

eropple 13y ago

Yammer did no such thing (and it's telling that you're sourcing a two-year-old article that misrepresents the situation under discussion): http://eng.yammer.com/scala-at-yammer/ http://eng.yammer.com/scala-at-yammer/ And Scala isn't the next Java. Frankly, it isn't simple enough to appeal to people who have become comfortable; it isn't unchallenging enough to supplant Java. This is not a demerit.

RivieraKid 13y ago
Right now at Yammer we're moving our basic infrastructure stack over to Java, and keeping Scala support around in the form of façades and legacy libraries. The link you provided doesn't contradict that. Language can be too simple or too complex. The tradeoff that gives maximum productivity is somewhere in the middle. And in my opinion, languages like Dart or Ceylon are much closer to the optimum than Scala.
- eropple 13y ago
  I don't think you've done anything to substantiate the claim that it's "too complex"; forgive my skepticism but I've spent enough time in both the Scala and C++ communities to draw a significant line between "too complex" and "critic hasn't learned it sufficiently" (and I've been on both sides of that line). I have spent a nontrivial amount of time with Kotlin and Ceylon and neither are particularly interesting to me after actually internalizing and understanding Scala; as an example, I am significantly hampered by their continued insistence on mutable-everywhere (which is basically the watchword for "barely adequate programmer"). They may very well be "the next Java", but that's a curse more than a compliment. You should not need Guava to write minimally competent code. Meanwhile, as a sibling comment notes, Twitter's a lot bigger than Yammer and pretty vocal about going whole-hog on Scala (and I've talked to them a little about what they've done, it's insanely impressive, I'm jealous). Guess they're just making things hard on themselves for no reason though.
  - RivieraKid 13y ago
    Linus Torvalds is in the C++ is too complex camp too AFAIK :) I believe that Ceylon is the best-designed general purpose language out there. What do you mean by "mutable-everywhere"? Ceylon's variables / attributes are immutable by default.