I don't think you can write idiomatic Scala with any one of those things exclusively. And I don't see why you'd even try. You might as we'll be arguing that the

I don't think you can write idiomatic Scala with any one of those things exclusively. And I don't see why you'd even try. You might as we'll be arguing that the language shouldn't have for-comprehensions, lambdas, pattern matching or keyword arguments the way I see it. These things (types) do have uses, but not as competing systems in Scala, but Features. I want to write c#'s using() statement, I'm not especially worried about performance, I can't go and add IDisposable to everything because I want to use it with other people's code and I don't feel like writing a Type Class every time I need to work with a new type. Structural typing is a really convenient feature for that. Case classes are just Scala's version of a data-object. If you didn't have them you'd just be writing your own version, poorly, and forgetting about hash code and equals and all the other stuff until it bit you. I really don't see a rationale here for removing these other than you find it offensive. I use Scala because of these things.