5 ms·
The main thing Swift is lacking compared to Scala is support functional programming. I'm not sure that's the part which you want to back away from. Apart from
by frowaway001 12y ago
The main thing Swift is lacking compared to Scala is support functional programming. I'm not sure that's the part which you want to back away from.
Apart from that, Scala is built on an impressively small amount of orthogonal concepts (at least compared to stuff like C#, F#, C++, OCaml, etc.) despite what all those "experts" on the Internet say. :-)
- pjmlp 12y agoSwift feels right at home in the ML language family. Not sure what you mean by lacking functional programming support.
- frowaway001 12y agoType-classes, monadic syntax and higher-kinded types come to mind.
- pjmlp 12y agoSo OCaml, Scheme and Lisp aren't functional programming languages?
- frowaway001 12y agoMaybe in the 80ies. I suppose with things like Agda, Idris & friends, one can say that the standards are rising.
- pjmlp 12y agoTime to throw away SICP then?!?
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- frowaway001 12y agoI think SICP is still very important from an educational POV. But I also think standards should reflect the progress made in the last few decades and shouldn't pretend that it's still 1960. Otherwise, things like Go happen. So, yes, functional languages these days should probably require types (not specific to functional languages, just a general requirement to throw out all untyped languages without wasting time), typeclasses, and at least one of higher-kinded types, linear/dependent types, type families, or something like the fusion of type-level and value-level programming like in Idris.