premium-concern

18 ms·

1. 151.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   Hindley-Milner means that you – unlike Scala – don't need to provide any type annotations at all as they can all be inferred. This comes at a steep price, as HM-inferable typesystems are very limited, and most languages have in fact a
2. 152.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   Yeah, these tens of kilobytes of JS next to those ten badly compressed 600kB jpgs are really killing it.
3. 153.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   IDEs, editors, SBT, ScalaFmt, Mima, WartRemover, etc. Yeah, build tools are usually terrible. Being "good enough" is enough for SBT to beat the other ones though. (Best incremental compilation, fast artifact resolution, reliable d
4. 154.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   I can recommend Scala: - It is mature and rock-solid, but still manages to evolve, fix issues and simplify/remove features. Most other languages are purely additive, meaning you will have to carry on all the baggage since the languages
5. 155.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   You can have both managed (T) and unmanaged pointers (Ptr[T]).
6. 156.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   > - It's standard library is small (~700KB), which is a stark contrast to Scala and some other JVM languages, which pretty much demand usage of ProGuard while developing due to large method count. A Scala Hello World is around 30 kB
7. 157.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   Have a look at Scala Native. Despite its young age it creates really fast, tight code (they have issues benchmarking things because Dotty Linker + LLVM gets rid of too much stuff).
8. 158.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   Considering how bad Typesafe is at promoting Scala, Scala's overwhelming success is _despite_ Typesafe's involvement, not because of it.
9. 159.▲
   by premium-concern 10y ago

   Did you try it? It's not really usable in its current state.
10. 160.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    It still is. Kotlin advocates are just very loud, while Scala devs are busy shipping real-world software projects.
11. 161.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    Not these (at least): Idris – implicit arguments Agda – instance arguments OCaml – Modular implicits :-)
12. 162.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    The spec mandates that type class instances can only be defined together with the type class or with the corresponding data type. While it's a very poor idea as no person except the author of the type class or the author of the data t
13. 163.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    Scala's typeclasses are first-class values and they actually work as advertised. Haskell's type classes are a mess because Haskell-the-spec (anti-modular, coherent) and Haskell-the-language (incoherent, "modular") work c
14. 164.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    10000s to 100000s roughly. I think the important part is to think about how to properly modularize your codebase and not overdoing it. That gets you an "internal" library ecosystem and not only ensures that incremental builds are
15. 165.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    Which Scala features do you have in mind?
16. 166.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    I wonder why Haskell people feel so hurt about Scala... It's much closer to Haskell's capabilities than pretty much any other functional language. It has better type classes, the compiler just got type inference for partially appl
17. 167.▲
    by premium-concern 10y ago

    I develop in Scala and I honestly have never experienced the concerns you are raising. "OOP" implies none of things you are worried about and Scala is a great example of that. I wished people tried the language before making assum