runT1ME

28 ms·

301.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Yes, but it is #14 Redmonk's rankings: https://redmonk.com/sogrady/2015/07/01/language-rankings-6-1...
302.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Here's what you do. Find a couple companies you want to work for. Find folks who work there on twitter/irc/github. Email them and say "I'd love to work at your company in a year, what can I do to prepare". Th
303.
by runT1ME 11y ago
It's just annoying to have to re-implement sequence/traverse and every combination of monad stacks you want to for each type. It's doable, but bug prone and frustrating. I now work for one of the largest scala teams in the US
304.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Exactly! You can also write a generic "sequence" over a list, for instance, so that any 'monad' (task/future, maybe/option, state, either/disjunction etc.) can 'swap places'. So your List<Futu
305.
by runT1ME 11y ago
https://github.com/scalaz/scalaz Monad Transformers for one. Traverse/Sequence are another super common (amazing) pattern that requires abstracting over types. http://eed3si9n.com/learning-scalaz-
306.
by runT1ME 11y ago
It's really not. I worked for a .NET shop that migrated some new projects to Scala. We evaluated F#, but decided the power of Scala was worth the platform switch. F# lacks higher kinds and implicit parameters, meaning you can't
307.
by runT1ME 11y ago
>Programming is different because you can use a text editor with copy, paste, autocomplete etc. But we don't do this. We use abstractions. Why doesn't the mathematician? (And you'll say of course they do). In which case
308.
by runT1ME 11y ago
http://mikehadlow.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/monads-in-c1-introd...
309.
by runT1ME 11y ago
>Whilst the code is terse it's also deceptive as it's not obvious it's performing a cross-join over multiple collections - so even in this case I'd prefer using a nested maps which IMO is more readable as it's cl
310.
by runT1ME 11y ago
>languages get by with a more readable I'd love to see how you think the kotlin (or java) version of the following would be more 'readable' var result = from a in taska from b in taskb fr
311.
by runT1ME 11y ago
You're really comparing a small subset of what "LINQ-like functional programming" is to the (small) pieces that Kotlin can do. LINQ is not (just) an interface over some collections. It is a comprehension syntax (that kotli
312.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Verizon is one of the bigger scala shops (a few hundred scala programmers on a "project") and is much closer to the functional side than a better Java. However, micro services and good library support mean some of the less experi
313.
by runT1ME 11y ago
I don't believe this is true, assuming your peers have had the proper training. As I said before we are one of the biggest scala shops and make heavy use of pure functional style and scalaz, it works out fine.
314.
by runT1ME 11y ago
I don't think any of scala's good features are even on a Java road map anywhere. It's actually a breath of fresh air to work on scala production systems. We don't use a mono repo and compile times are negligible. We ar
315.
by runT1ME 11y ago
I have a third reason. Abstraction, or code de-duplication, if done right, ends up making code easier to reason about. The paper that made me rethink everything I knew is http://www.mpi-sws.org/~dreyer/tor/pape
316.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Anecdotal, but I've gotten more legitimate job leads from my Twitter account than I have from my LinkedIn account. At least it's Engineering Managers or other Lead Engineers inviting me to interview on Twitter, I only see recruit
317.
by runT1ME 11y ago
as smt88 said, TypeScript sounds like the obvious choice. He probably enjoys the type safety aspect of C# along with Visual Studio (or whatever IDE he uses). You appreciate the fact that the same code on the server runs on the client. Yo
318.
by runT1ME 11y ago
That doesn't sound too different than the american education system, except without the refund.
319.
by runT1ME 11y ago
the internet/self taught.
320.
by runT1ME 11y ago
They aren't really competitors to each other, so it depends much more on the type of applications you'd prefer to write. Swift is not a good choice for backend applications for obvious reasons, and nor would it be a good choice f
321.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Ok weird, as a scala programmer these aren't the main pain points when I go to a less powerful language. I miss monadic comprehension, implicit parameters/higher kinded types (for type classes) and inference the most.
322.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Scala has higher kinded types (or, generics over generics). This is amazing (but can take a while to see why/get confortable with). .NET doesn't have this feature.
323.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Ah. The big deal is some languages can abstract over the idea of an arbitrary monad. You are correct though, most monads are not a big deal and fall into the "oh neat that's useful" category, and not the "omfg" one.
324.
by runT1ME 11y ago
In terms of total compensation are they really that much different from other big companies? I know a fair amount of folks making Netflix level money when you factor in stock. They just give it in cash. shrug
325.
by runT1ME 11y ago
You keep spreading your misinformed FUD about scala every time someone mentions it in a thread. Do you really continue to maintain the position that scala is not used successfully by large teams?
326.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Uh... What do you think monad transformers do?
327.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Leave out how long it took you to learn node.js and parse.com. It's not relevant. Probably get rid of the whole personal skills. Condense Current/Previous projects into 'experience'. Leave out all non-technical jobs (in
328.
by runT1ME 11y ago
I know quite a few developers that are only interested in working at companies that have bought in to functional programming. The fact that they're willing to invest in a less popular language says a lot of good things about their eng
329.
by runT1ME 11y ago
Can you show me the equivalent java code? I would guess it's 200 lines of java or more. I would much rather spend the time to learn what that's doing than reading 200 lines of java.
330.
by runT1ME 11y ago
This is crazy talk. Scala (and .NET to a lesser extent) both make use of special language features for making monads easier to deal with, and neither of them forbid side effecting (IO). For comprehension and LINQ comprehension are both

More ›