sideeffffect

12 ms·

61.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
I don't now what situation was Scala in 10 years ago. But the situation it is now couldn't be further from "free fall". It is _the_ language where most of the Functional Programming in the industry takes place (that&#x27
62.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
I would use Scala. I like FP and Scala comes with some awesome libraries for concurrent/async programming like Cats Effect or ZIO. Good choice for creating modern style micro-services to be run in the cloud (or even macro-services, Sca
63.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
But they are being multiplexed on more than one Platform thread this time.
64.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Wow, really? I've always thought that Cargo by default forces a package into one particular version. And that a particular package in multiple versions is something people opt into only in rare circumstances (similarly as in Java/
65.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
To be frank, any language's syntax is rather busy compared to F#. That language is setting the bar how beautifully a language can look. I don't know of any that comes close, not even Haskell or Python...
66.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
SML comes with many implementations/compilers, but it is one standardized language (with formalized and verified semantics, IIRC). Does that mean that there is one repository with modules (like PyPI or Maven Central) which all the impl
67.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
I'm just surprised that I had to scroll so down to see a correct characterization of the article...
68.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
I really liked, when I used them, how well integrated all the tools were: BitBucket, JIRA, Confluence... You could see PRs related to a given ticket, see tickets in wiki, I'm sure it integrates well with CI (Bamboo/Pipelines?), et
69.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
IntelliJ Community Edition is indeed Free Software! Apache 2.0 license, to be specific. It's an awesome product, I recommend everybody to use it. I personally use it with its amazing Scala plug-in, also friendly licensed.
70.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
JMESPath is what JSONPath should have been https://jmespath.org/ specified, standardized, with tests and implementations for multiple languages
71.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
> Rust-like programming language that was just a little bit higher level I think the best answer is Scala. It has an awesome community/libraries/ecosystem. See this for example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?
72.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
Scala. With the functional effect systems, like Cats Effect or ZIO, you get superpowers. Not only can write programs that are "async", but you also get easy retries (and other tricks), safe refactorability (because of its Pure FP
73.
by sideeffffect 4y ago
This BSL Business Source License is endorsed by neither the Free Software Foundation nor OSI https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html https://opensource.org/licenses/alphabetical That&#x2
74.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
Officious: Rise of the Busybody State https://www.amazon.com/Officious-Busybody-State-Josie-Applet... In Anglo-Saxon countries there is a new and distinctive form of state: the busybody state. This state is defined by an at
75.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> doing FP in Scala versus alternatives I think Scala is the language most actual functional programming on this planet takes place these days. Be it just FP or pure FP. I especially like pure FP in Scala. One can do that with Cats Effec
76.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> cats or zio are basically ports of Haskel into Scala Not really. And ZIO takes special pride in that not being the case. That's not to say that the authors didn't know (about) Haskell and its libraries. But these are distinct
77.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> I don't even view Scala as a functional language, as functions (methods) are not first class. Lambdas are encoded as objects with a single method. It's much more expressive than Java and so better at expressing many functiona
78.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> awkward currying Personally, even though I haven't really thought it through deeply, I feel like Scala would be better if everything were curried. > Subtyping also has many complex consequences But also substantial benefits! &g
79.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> scala/functional engineers are also more likely to focus their energies on monads and type theory rather than product delivery This feels to me like a low effort and vague criticism. Essentially, this is a complaint about an arbit
80.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> Scala is to Haskell what F# is to Ocaml That's not quite precise, IMHO. F# is an awesome language that I hold very dear, but it is a castrated form of OCaml. It has only a few features that OCaml doesn't have. For example Typ
81.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
F#'s "Computation expressions" are the same sort of thing as the mentioned Haskell's "do notation" and Scala's "for comprehension". They're just thin syntactic sugar for "callbacks&quot
82.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
I'm almost sure that Haskell has had its "do notation" even before 2007. And maybe even Scala its "for comprehension".
83.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> JDK 17 has most of the good features of Scala and Kotlin. I'd be sooo happy if that were the case, but sadly, it's not. From the point of view of Scala, I still see many features missing. Roughly in the order of importance: *
84.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
Since you mentioned using IntelliJ, I can't resist asking the question: Have you played with Scala too? If yes, how would you compare OCaml to it?
85.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
I don't know much about OCaml, only Scala and Cats Effect/ZIO/Monix, but would appreciate if I could get a gist of what Multicore OCaml brings to the table. Is there somebody who's familiar with both worlds and could com
86.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
Could you explain why you wanted to avoid the term (excuse the pun :) ) "type" so much?
87.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
> Empirical is the only system I know of that can infer types while staying static. F#'s Type Providers can do that too. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fsharp/tutorials/typ...
88.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
Can you please compare to 11 or even 8?
89.
by sideeffffect 5y ago
If I contribute a code under the new CLA, is Grafana Labs allowed to relicense that contribution under a non-copyleft license, like Apache Public License 2.0, without my further permission? If yes, than it's a really bad bad thing and
90.
by sideeffffect 6y ago
> I think Scala will always suffer from its choice to make implicits so fundamental. Thankfully it won't. Scala 3 deconstructs implicits and discourages (or outright discards) the bad parts: http://dotty.epfl.ch/docs

More ›