laureny

45 ms·

421.
by laureny 14y ago
> It might be surprising but Scala actually has significantly fewer language features than Java. It is also more regular, there are fewer special cases and surprises. Yes, that's what all the Typesafe employees repeat ad nauseam at conf
422.
by laureny 14y ago
> Isn't that just repeating the “all languages are equal”-myth? No, it's debunking the myth that you can compare any two languages and say which one is objectively superior. There is no such total ordering.
423.
by laureny 14y ago
> One of the differences, though, is that these things were mostly highly responsive, because they were bloat-free. That's not my recollection of the Smalltalk IDE at all. I especially remember how selecting was crazy slow: press down
424.
by laureny 14y ago
Congratulations to 37signals for adopting a hiring practice that most companies have been using for more than a decade.
425.
by laureny 14y ago
Saying that Scala is a superior language is like saying that the red color is superior to blue. It's not false, it's just silly.
426.
by laureny 14y ago
> Maybe they moved to Scala because Scala is a superior language. As you are probably aware, this is a highly controversial claim and there is certainly no widespread agreement on it.
427.
by laureny 14y ago
> This is mostly due to the Scala compiler being a bit slow. True. Reloading pages on Play 1 (Java) took less than a second. It's about ten seconds now on Play 2 because of Scala. The move to Scala feels like a mixed bag to me: it added
428.
by laureny 14y ago
Every company thinks they have one of the best engineering teams. Especially in the Silicon Valley.
429.
by laureny 14y ago
Because a blog post is different from an email discussion.
430.
by laureny 14y ago
> it's also fairly convenient to glance at an email message and immediately be able to infer with reasonable confidence what level of expertise to expect from the stranger on the other end You are confusing "level of expertise" with "nu
431.
by laureny 14y ago
Didn't I just call C++ "mainstream"?
432.
by laureny 14y ago
> How is this different from the recently released Play framework Just a nitpick: Play was initially released in 2007, so I wouldn't call it a "recent" framework :-)
433.
by laureny 14y ago
Didn't I just single out C++ as the only mainstream language being slow to compile?
434.
by laureny 14y ago
Agreed. In terms of compilation times, Scala feels as slow in compilation times as C++ did in the early 2000's. Kotlin and Ceylon are showing that it's possible to be a modern JVM language and still compile fast. Hopefully, Scala can learn
435.
by laureny 14y ago
> most languages' compilers aren't that fast All mainstream languages compile in about that ballpark, if not faster. I've always found it odd that one of the driving design principles of Go was "fast compilation". It's always struck me
436.
by laureny 14y ago
Not just that, he also ordered his company to kill all contributions to charity as soon as he was in power. This trend has now been reversed since his passing.
437.
by laureny 14y ago
Can't be harder to look up than "Go".
438.
by laureny 14y ago
Calling this "FUD" is a bit over the top. Call it inaccurate information if you wish, but "FUD" implies willful intention to deceive, and I really don't see this in the article. Sadly, these days, "FUD" has become synonym for "this person i
439.
by laureny 14y ago
tl;dr: polymorphism is usually better than if/else.
440.
by laureny 14y ago
> In Python I run into a lot of programmer related bugs that Haskell's rigid type system prevents. Isn't your productivity gain coming from using a statically typed language rather than Haskell specifically? It feels like any statically
441.
by laureny 14y ago
I'm excited about the prospect of driverless cars but at this point, even a regular car design by Google would get my money in a heart beat. I imagine a nice Nexus 10 as the main console and extreme environment friendliness.
442.
by laureny 14y ago
This is more of a case of a stupid library than stupid language. And whether it's a stupid library is even debatable. map() has gained a more popular understanding from functional programming these days but it was probably not so when this
443.
by laureny 14y ago
It's hard to be wrong when you claim that you either eventually hate or stop using a software tool. I can't think of many tools that escape this simple truth.
444.
by laureny 14y ago
> not using verbose Java-like languages that require IDEs for the all the boilerplate and rote refactoring. You probably need to revisit your opinion on IDE's, they haven't been used for boiler plate code since the late 90's with Visual
445.
by laureny 14y ago
> Well that's embarrassing. Looks like I need to revamp my searching skills. Shouldn't be your job, the web site should take care of it. Then again, Hacker News' code base looks like it hasn't been touched in six years.
446.
by laureny 14y ago
> Do you really think the use of dynamically typed languages is an important enough factor to require justification? Yes, because when you pick a dynamically typed language, you are giving up on important advantages that become crucial
447.
by laureny 14y ago
Sorry but claiming that executables written in a dynamically typed languages are resistant to invalid dynamic linking is not just bizarre, it's nonsense. Either the code you are writing is 100% in the dynamically typed language and it could
448.
by laureny 14y ago
> The last problem is with compilation time, which can eat into development time the same way that testing does. Good point. More modern languages fix some of the flaws found in Java. Among which: Scala (not really "modern" since it's t
449.
by laureny 14y ago
Here is the bottom line: static typing is getting much closer to the sweet spot by increasingly gaining dynamic typing advantages (e.g. type inference, which means less verbose sources) than dynamically typed languages are going in the othe
450.
by laureny 14y ago
Right, just a nit pick:t if get() times out, it throws a TimeoutException instead of returning null (much cleaner).

More ›