11–20 of 161 posts
Regardless of Scala, it's an absolutely insane idea to develop your own language to write your apps. Either stick to the real Scala or switch to Java or Kotlin, but writing your own language is a failure waiting to happen. I give this project a few more months before it gets canceled.
ah yes rewriting in a new language, the classic not-insane approach
I have been writing scala for 2 years, mostly in spark and flink and as much as I love parts of it, overall, the language is just not the most approachable. Some of the features are super valuable every once in a while, but I might gladly give some of them up for a streamlined language that is easier to get people started on (while not just writing imperative style Java with Scala syntax)
My other curiosity is compatibly. If I can compile a subset of my project much faster that doesn't need all of Scala, that seems like an okay place to be in.
I am a bit concerned that between the Scala, Dotty, Typelevel, and now the Reasonable Scala Compiler, that the Scala community might become fragmented. Hopefully the rsc's claim of "making our findings available to the Scala community at large" holds true. Edit: should have keep reading before commenting. In their related work document: >we are definitely not declaring Lightbend Scala dead. To the contrary, we view o…
It will be interesting to see what the subset is. I have been writing scala for 2 years, mostly in spark and flink and as much as I love parts of it, overall, the language is just not the most approachable. Some of the features are super valuable every once in a while, but I might gladly give some of them up for a streamlined language that is easier to get people started on (while not just writing imperative style Ja…
Scala can be too hard sometimes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a new language, it's a reduced subset of the same language.
You're playing with words. They are creating their own language which is a subset of Scala, and they decide which features to keep based on whether they are fast enough to compile. The point is: developing your own language to ship your apps is crazy.
If you insist on them "creating a new language" then say that they created a new language to speed up development, not to ship their apps. They were already shopping their apps. This is an optimization that helps them speed up development on their existing codebase.
It will be interesting to see what the subset is. I have been writing scala for 2 years, mostly in spark and flink and as much as I love parts of it, overall, the language is just not the most approachable. Some of the features are super valuable every once in a while, but I might gladly give some of them up for a streamlined language that is easier to get people started on (while not just writing imperative style Ja…
Totally. Its interesting that they approach this from a compile speed angle, I wonder how much they are also considering the mental load of certain features.
This might become an interesting project for companies already doing Scala. New ones at this point will probably prefer Kotlin.
Twitter is not performing well as a business. It is also at almost all time low. Should it be working on a new language/compiler?
Regardless of Scala, it's an absolutely insane idea to develop your own language to write your apps. Either stick to the real Scala or switch to Java or Kotlin, but writing your own language is a failure waiting to happen. I give this project a few more months before it gets canceled.
Funny you should mention Kotlin, as it's the result of JetBrains doing just that: developing their own language to write their apps. Mozilla represents another successful example with Rust. I'm of the opinion that developing new, purpose-built languages (or extending existing ones) is a strategy that isn't given as much consideration as it should.