3 ms·
How did Odersky miss Yammer's citing Scala's complexity as a reason for moving away from it? Odersky said: > In terms of complexity, I don't know whether Yamme
by aaronharnly 12y ago
How did Odersky miss Yammer's citing Scala's complexity as a reason for moving away from it? Odersky said:
> In terms of complexity, I don't know whether Yammer featured that, but you definitely do hear that a lot [from] many people.
The first paragraph (after introductory greetings) of Yammer's letter which explains its action [1]:
> Scala, as a language, has some profoundly interesting ideas in it. That's one of
the things which attracted me to it in the first place. But it's also a very
complex language.
[1] https://gist.github.com/anonymous/1406238 https://gist.github.com/anonymous/1406238
- the_af 12y agoIndeed. Another example from the fourth paragraph of the letter: "Scala, as a language, has some profoundly interesting ideas in it. That's one of the things which attracted me to it in the first place. But it's also a very complex language. The number of concepts I had to explain to new members of our team for even the simplest usage of a collection was surprising: implicit parameters, builder typeclasses, "operator overloading", return type inference, etc. etc." It seems very clear the language's complexity was a major problem for Yammer.
- tormeh 12y agoI wonder if that means Odersky's not really listening to criticism, which would be really bad. EDIT: He does, he just doesn't remember where it's coming from.