happy_dino

11 ms·

31.
by happy_dino 13y ago
“I tried to teach my son some of the most horrible to learn languages. It didn't work out well.” Colour me surprised.
32.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> and then a whole bunch of poorly thought out, wankerish features that can only serve to screw up your code base if some developer gets bored and makes the mistake of using them. I'd love to see an example of that!
33.
by happy_dino 13y ago
For instance Scala's support for composition and modularization of library fragments which allows you to separate even heavily interwoven concerns into tidy parts and put them together whenever and wherever you like it (or exchange som
34.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I still can't see what you mean with "all those Scala features [...] crammed into a single language", is there anything more specific?
35.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I think we have a major philosophical difference and talking a bit past each other. Here are the two things why I am using Scala: 1. Confidence Scala gives me the confidence that I can build software the way I imagine, I can focus on the us
36.
by happy_dino 13y ago
PART TWO There was one thing that really bothered me at the time, which was the inclusion of XML in the language. I wasn't too fond of XML, didn't think it would last, and thought it a sign of thoughtless trend-follow
37.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Let's just say that I have a bit more, up-to-date experience with the language and I value its consistency, coherence and elegance. One thing I really like is that Scala pushes for more general, generic solutions, instead of ad-hoc add
38.
by happy_dino 13y ago
This is quite some incredibly confused rant. :-) I think it is totally OK to dislike a language for pretty much any reason, but that wall of text reads a lot like “I never actually used the language, but here are some things I read on the i
39.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I still wonder why Go is so prone to religious fanboys, though.
40.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Wow, they still mention that non-sense in the FAQ? Let me guess, they also still link to that “OMG Generics are so hard” article where they conveniently manage to ignore the comments which point out the elephant in the room?
41.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> what Scala should have been (and wanted to be) before it > was overcome with a desire to prove that a compiler can > do all sorts of crazy stuff. It's hard for me to > understand what problem Scala is trying
42.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I still can't decide what's more embarrassing: That the US have a third-world health care system or that people act like it is a hard, unsolved issue to implement something better.
43.
by happy_dino 13y ago
http://blog.xamarin.com/introducing-ios-7-support/
44.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Just use the effect system plugin? Anyway, while I generally agree, I'd wish that people would stop bringing up type-inference in these discussions. It always makes me question whether those persons have understood the topic at all.
45.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Judging from the article, languages like C# or F# won't fit his bill. Why would a language which is so far behind C#/F# be a solution?
46.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Yeah, let's use a memory unsafe language, handle memory management by hand and just completely ignore the fact that no human being has ever managed to consistently write bullet-proof code in it. Using software which automates memory ma
47.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> not having to worry about the JVM GC freeze Bad engineers blame their tools.
48.
by happy_dino 13y ago
People like you make me really feel ashamed of the human race.
49.
by happy_dino 13y ago
People like you make me really feel ashamed of the human race.
50.
by happy_dino 13y ago
That's my experience, too. Of course there are things which are not quite simple in both languages, but in Scala those things are features which actually enable me to solve issues, not some language design failures from 1995 with which
51.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> I like Java. I am able to be quite productive with it along with Spring and Guava. Hibernate, though somewhat finicky, makes dealing with databases almost trivial. Spring and Hibernate made me abandon Java. I still recall my reaction w
52.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I see that you have made up your mind, but I'd still be very happy to see an actual code example, as mentioned earlier (or even better, a link to a bug ticket :-D).
53.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> 1. Java. I said "modern language". > 2. First, the changes are too large, then the changes are too small? What now? It's bad if new Scala versions don't ship with full-scale library support, but it's also ba
54.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> What? I disagree with your notion of equating types with tests. They are fundamentally different. Types provide substantially stronger guarantees without having to execute any code. > The type system does need more information from
55.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Fair enough, as mentioned, it was not targeted at you. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough. I was mainly summarizing my impression of the (sad) current standard of debate in interested circles.
56.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I just wanted to highlight how bizarre this discussion has become in general (nothing against you, it seems to be a common theme): “““ I'm unhappy with Scala's compatibility guarantees, therefore I'll pick a lan
57.
by happy_dino 13y ago
I'd love to see a code example!
58.
by happy_dino 13y ago
Q: What does java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: clojure.lang.RestFn.<init>(I)V mean? A: It means you have some code that was AOT (ahead-of-time) compiled with a different version of Clojure than the one you&
59.
by happy_dino 13y ago
This is because the types can be derived from the ones declared, not because joins are suddenly “dynamically” typed. Static types != manifest types.
60.
by happy_dino 13y ago
> SQL doesn't require you to create up-front static types You realize that DML/DQL is only one part of SQL? It also includes a DDL. All the types are right in there.

More ›