3 ms·

You should try haskell sometime, their version of collections is much better. Complaints about cabal are of the same nature as complaints about every package m

by Sssnake 13y ago

You should try haskell sometime, their version of collections is much better. Complaints about cabal are of the same nature as complaints about every package manager "hey I tried to do something that can't be done and it said it can't be done". Having used all three languages, I still use haskell daily, I would use clojure again if demanded without complaint, and I would never in a million years consider touching scala again, ever.

frowaway001 13y ago
The last time I looked chaining collection operations still required unnecessary boilerplate and was not even the default way to use collections. Did they fix that? As far as I know, they didn't. Additionally, it seems that moving from lists to a different collection type still involves rewriting your whole code due to the insane idea of using different functions by default (fmap/map, mempty/[], mappend/++). I just don't have to deal with any of these design mistakes in Scala. Having sane defaults and stuff that "just works" consistently are a huge benefit.
- Sssnake 13y ago
  >The last time I looked chaining collection operations still required unnecessary boilerplate and was not even the default way to use collections. Did they fix that? I can't even imagine what you are talking about, so I can't say if they "fixed it" or not. >Additionally, it seems that moving from lists to a different collection type still involves rewriting your whole code due to the insane idea of using different functions by default "I did something dumb and now I don't like it". So, don't do it? Why were you using map in the first place? >I just don't have to deal with any of these design mistakes in Scala I don't have to deal with them in haskell either. But I do have to deal with the hundreds of other mistakes scala made if I use it.

3 ms·

You should try haskell sometime, their version of collections is much better. Complaints about cabal are of the same nature as complaints about every package m

by Sssnake 13y ago

frowaway001 13y ago
The last time I looked chaining collection operations still required unnecessary boilerplate and was not even the default way to use collections. Did they fix that? As far as I know, they didn't. Additionally, it seems that moving from lists to a different collection type still involves rewriting your whole code due to the insane idea of using different functions by default (fmap/map, mempty/[], mappend/++). I just don't have to deal with any of these design mistakes in Scala. Having sane defaults and stuff that "just works" consistently are a huge benefit.
- Sssnake 13y ago
  >The last time I looked chaining collection operations still required unnecessary boilerplate and was not even the default way to use collections. Did they fix that? I can't even imagine what you are talking about, so I can't say if they "fixed it" or not. >Additionally, it seems that moving from lists to a different collection type still involves rewriting your whole code due to the insane idea of using different functions by default "I did something dumb and now I don't like it". So, don't do it? Why were you using map in the first place? >I just don't have to deal with any of these design mistakes in Scala I don't have to deal with them in haskell either. But I do have to deal with the hundreds of other mistakes scala made if I use it.