81–90 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obligatory comparison: https://leverich.github.io/swiftislikescala/
The comparison should be updated to Swift 3. Swift syntax is more intuitive and readable than Scala. A common mistake in language design is to depart from C syntax, without substantial gain. For example, replacing {}, &&, || with other things. Swift strikes a great balance between intuition and innovation.
Example?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's a lot like Groovy: http://glaforge.appspot.com/article/apple-s-swift-programmin... No, it's a lot like C#: http://swiftcomparsion.qiniudn.com
Neither Scala nor Apache Groovy are listed in the 8 languages Swift was influenced by on its Wikipedia page. That Groovy link was written by the Apache's Groovy PMC chairperson, and is more wishful thinking that fact.
Scala might have influenced Swift. Zip you go to the author's blog, he says lists those languages and says many more that he doesn't name:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with Scala is not that it has all the features of Swift, it's that it has way more. Scala developers see this as an advantage, everybody else sees that as a liability. Swift and Kotin manage to capture the perfect amount of "a few new features but not too many" of all languages I've played with these past ten years. They are both the perfect example of languages that hit the right compromise in many dimen…
I am terrified of working with experienced Scala developers. The code they write is less about implementing some business functionality in the most elegant way possible. But rather it's an exercise in who can use the most obscure parts of the language. And unfortunately there are far too many obscure parts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am terrified of working with experienced Scala developers. The code they write is less about implementing some business functionality in the most elegant way possible. But rather it's an exercise in who can use the most obscure parts of the language. And unfortunately there are far too many obscure parts.
I have never seen this.
Most Scala developers are in the A bracket. The experts are in the L. The code written by either is so different they could almost be different languages. You don't get this sort of split in Swift, Java etc.
I hope they will look at Erlang/OTP instead of Java EE for inspiration.
I've seen people try to recreate Erlang/OTP in Java. See OpenCloud Rhino. They never really get there. It's kind of sad to watch. I mean, it's useful if you absolutely have to use Java, but it's expensive and a pale imitation of Erlang/OTP. I'm confident that it will remain so until it dies.
I hope they will look at Erlang/OTP instead of Java EE for inspiration.
I'm a Swift developer, I'm learning Elixir & I love OTP's model. In my opinion Apple or anyone else won't go in that direction is because it's way different & it's learning curve will push most developers away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never seen this.
The levels of enlightenment: http://www.scala-lang.org/old/node/8610 Most Scala developers are in the A bracket. The experts are in the L. The code written by either is so different they could almost be different languages. You don't get this sort of split in Swift, Java etc.
All languages have this. You could write more or less the same list for Swift or Java with minimal changes.
Again, do you have any actual experience with this, or is this just your assumption? Because I have never seen this issue in the wild.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think most languages thatare popular today are 'best of most worlds' for their users. For example, Scala has all the features you specified and has an even larger ecosystem of libraries for the server side. I am still happy that this has been done as I know having a common API to program against does ease development and creates a great ecosystem as evidenced by node.JS.
The problem with Scala is not that it has all the features of Swift, it's that it has way more. Scala developers see this as an advantage, everybody else sees that as a liability. Swift and Kotin manage to capture the perfect amount of "a few new features but not too many" of all languages I've played with these past ten years. They are both the perfect example of languages that hit the right compromise in many dimen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with Scala is not that it has all the features of Swift, it's that it has way more. Scala developers see this as an advantage, everybody else sees that as a liability. Swift and Kotin manage to capture the perfect amount of "a few new features but not too many" of all languages I've played with these past ten years. They are both the perfect example of languages that hit the right compromise in many dimen…
The real problem with Scala is Java. Most of us over here in C / Ruby / Python land or .NET land have been bitten by dipping our toe into Java and now avoid it like the plague.
You almost never need to deal with Java except if you want to.
Plus, unlike C/Ruby/Python/.NET you get a JS backend that actually works¹ (unlike mess like GWT, or various other languages).
¹ In the sense of: Scala.js is stable, mature and production-ready. You can use it, save a lot of time, share a lot of code, use mny of the libraries you already know, enjoy great IDE and tooling support, use it in real projects and make money with it.