Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Road to Scala 3

scala-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 196 posts

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#21

Post by yahyaheee »

leetrout wrote: post #7
dominotw wrote: post #5

I switched to clojure for a new job from doing scala for 5 years. I just feel a weight has been lifted off of my head. Weight of syntax, slow compilation, weight of implicits ( some of them are so bad even editors like idea couldn't figure out what is going on). And most importantly the weight of the constant feeling of not being able to fully understand the meaning of endless math terms thrown at me casually like mo…

This touches on a difference between the Go and Scala communities and courses from my very brief experience learning scala for work the past couple months. The older I get the more I want things that are explicit and easy to understand. Tons of sites and videos and blogs exist that break down the features of Go without a ton of math lingo. I never see Scala materials free of that. Even when I agree that I need to und…

Yup being easy to understand without lacking functionality is definitely superior to supporting every insane programming concept. It builds stronger communities and better software

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#22

Post by continuational »

yahyaheee wrote: post #18
continuational wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go is just barely statically typed though, with its lack of generics. Some day soon, it will tacked onto the language; a language that wasn't designed with that in mind. I don't know about pace, but in absolute terms, Go is far behind even the oldest versions of Scala.

That would be missing the point of Go. It’s not as though the Go team is incapable of introducing genetics they just took a hard line on not putting anything into the language that wasn’t absolutely needed. This built a simpler language and because of that a stronger community, which is why Go has all but entirely eaten scalas lunch

The marketing is very impressive indeed, I won't argue against that. I can only think of Angular 1.0 as an equally impressive feat of advertising (I totally bought into that - for a while).

But logically, what you suggest implies that either generics aren't absolutely needed, and shouldn't be in Go, or it's absolutely needed, and Go has been lacking them for a long time.

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#23

Post by bcrosby95 »

yahyaheee wrote: post #18
continuational wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go is just barely statically typed though, with its lack of generics. Some day soon, it will tacked onto the language; a language that wasn't designed with that in mind. I don't know about pace, but in absolute terms, Go is far behind even the oldest versions of Scala.

That would be missing the point of Go. It’s not as though the Go team is incapable of introducing genetics they just took a hard line on not putting anything into the language that wasn’t absolutely needed. This built a simpler language and because of that a stronger community, which is why Go has all but entirely eaten scalas lunch

This line of reasoning never made sense to me because there's plenty of stuff in the language that isn't absolutely needed, such as the various special syntax for certain concurrency constructs.

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#24

Post by jkachmar »

yahyaheee wrote: post #21
leetrout wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This touches on a difference between the Go and Scala communities and courses from my very brief experience learning scala for work the past couple months. The older I get the more I want things that are explicit and easy to understand. Tons of sites and videos and blogs exist that break down the features of Go without a ton of math lingo. I never see Scala materials free of that. Even when I agree that I need to und…

Yup being easy to understand without lacking functionality is definitely superior to supporting every insane programming concept. It builds stronger communities and better software

Big ol’ “Citation Needed” on this one.

The flip-side here is that a language that doesn’t support basic programming language theory concepts dooms its users to repeat the mistakes of those who discovered them.

I also would personally disagree that any statically types language without generic types and without non-nullability (e.g. `Option`/`Maybe` and `Result`/`Either`) is severely lacking in the ability to express programs that are easy to understand.

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#26

Post by continuational »

yahyaheee wrote: post #19
haggy wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Scala is declining And the proof of this is... Where?

Used to write scala, what a mess looking back on it now. Everyone I know that was writing it is now writing Go/Kotlin/Elixer

Sounds a bit like they just like to try out new languages.

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#27

Post by xvilka »

maxaf wrote: post #6
haggy wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Scala is declining And the proof of this is... Where?

I won’t even mention the anecdata from my own workplace. I’ll only say that within my extended network people are frantically rewriting Scala bits in other languages. Those who are stuck with it (because of, say, extensive prior investment into Spark) are scrambling to come up with alternate solutions. Put your ear to the ground, and you too will hear it.

There is an ongoing work on creating Spark alternative in Rust[1][2]. Hopefully, that could help.

[1] https://github.com/rajasekarv/native_spark

[2] https://medium.com/@rajasekar3eg/fastspark-a-new-fast-native...

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#28

Post by yahyaheee »

continuational wrote: post #22
yahyaheee wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be missing the point of Go. It’s not as though the Go team is incapable of introducing genetics they just took a hard line on not putting anything into the language that wasn’t absolutely needed. This built a simpler language and because of that a stronger community, which is why Go has all but entirely eaten scalas lunch

The marketing is very impressive indeed, I won't argue against that. I can only think of Angular 1.0 as an equally impressive feat of advertising (I totally bought into that - for a while). But logically, what you suggest implies that either generics aren't absolutely needed, and shouldn't be in Go, or it's absolutely needed, and Go has been lacking them for a long time.

no it just implies the don't willy nilly throw in any feature into the language like Scala, and I am incredibly grateful for it after writing Scala for a couple years, what a mess

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#29

Post by xvilka »

bcherny wrote: post #3

I really love Scala, but I worry about its future given Google putting its weight behind Kotlin, and the two offering a lot of the same features and philosophy. Does anyone know if the Scala maintainers have addressed this directly?

Kotlin wins also because it has a stable and usable Native flavor. Scala Native is a third-party project and seems dead, while Kotlin Native is the core part of the Kotlin language and being developed at a fast pace.

Re: The Road to Scala 3

#30

Post by yahyaheee »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #23
yahyaheee wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be missing the point of Go. It’s not as though the Go team is incapable of introducing genetics they just took a hard line on not putting anything into the language that wasn’t absolutely needed. This built a simpler language and because of that a stronger community, which is why Go has all but entirely eaten scalas lunch

This line of reasoning never made sense to me because there's plenty of stuff in the language that isn't absolutely needed, such as the various special syntax for certain concurrency constructs.

They look at how their software is being used and the problems people are encountering using it and then decide what is the best path. To roughly quote Rob Pike 'every feature is useful, but they all have a cost, and its about weighing the outcomes'
Post reply on HN