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

Scala projects are difficult to maintain

mungingdata.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 235 posts

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#111

Post by thinkharderdev »

tpetry wrote: post #73
dfgdghdf wrote: post #55

Is the Scala language simply too big? I tried to learn it once (years ago) and quickly found myself overwhelmed by the number of concepts. I remember feeling like 80% of power of the language could have been achieved with 20% of the complexity. The latest Java releases are somewhat proving this with functional interfaces and records.

Had the same feeling many years ago when i wanted to learn it. Bought the book of some the main creator (?) behind scala and started to read and experiment with on a weekend. But every chapter was filled with many completely different ways on how to solve something. In the end i decided that scala looks really great, but will be really problematic in a team if everything can be done on so many different styles. It lo…

I don't see this as a particularly bad problem in Scala tbh. Any language that is mature enough to be used for a large project will include many different ways of solving common problems. I'm old enough to remember listening to J2EE developers arguing endlessly about which GoF design patterns to use in which situations, usually resulting in using roughly all of them in one way or another so everyone could feel included.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#112

Post by AzzieElbab »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #100
anthonyskipper wrote: post #20

I had a startup that went all in on scala. By the time we realized we chose the wrong language it was too late. Complexity is the primary issue with the scala language... when the whole goal is to have a scalable language which in itself is diametrically opposed to simplicity, your language is dead on arrival. After using Scala, Go seemed like a dream come true. We really loved the integration of OO and FP, really mi…

I think Scala needs to be treated something like how smart shops treat C++: there's so much there you can hang yourself with, so you need to define a subset/dialect and create a style guide and stick with it. This is how C++ has been successful at Google, and it's how I'd approach something like Scala if I were to go back to doing it now.

That is exactly it. A company wide style and coding guide is a must with scala

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#113

Post by taeric »

orwin wrote: post #103
taeric wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair. I didn't know if there was any practice overlap. For me, lisp is bigger in the meta programming. Really pulls the covers back on how things relate. Not just in how to put the code together, but how to look at the data. Scala was my first big intro to category theory. Helped me see relations in some higher ideas. Many, though, are hard to see a priori.

The issue i have with metaprogramming (lisp or elixir but also C++ macro) is that it is easy to forget, unlike most programming principle. It require you to twist your mind, and if you stop for two-three years, it require efforts to put your head back in that space.

I've found that as long as you keep it transparent and focus on what the shape of the data is, things go easier than you'd expect.

That said, a lot of things folks reach for with meta programming, I think should get a pass. The goal shouldn't be to make the code like a text. The goal should be to heavily leverage core data structures.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#114

Post by PopsiclePete »

anthonyskipper wrote: post #20

I had a startup that went all in on scala. By the time we realized we chose the wrong language it was too late. Complexity is the primary issue with the scala language... when the whole goal is to have a scalable language which in itself is diametrically opposed to simplicity, your language is dead on arrival. After using Scala, Go seemed like a dream come true. We really loved the integration of OO and FP, really mi…

> but simplicity trumps doing either of those things well.

That's the genius (?) of Go. They gave us what we didn't know we needed.

Software people love the "manliness" that comes with "serious", "real" programming languages. Maybe it's the desire to impress our peers with our intelligence? But in the end the only thing that matters is whether you can get your shit done and on time in at least a semi-working state.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#115

Post by mumblemumble »

nowherebeen wrote: post #109
mumblemumble wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. That's pretty much how the Scala project I was working on ran itself aground. Everyone got so caught up in flexing at each other that solving actual business problems became a secondary priority.

This points to a culture problem more than the language itself though.

Interestingly, when we were working on the Java code, we didn't have this problem. Same people, same time, same git repository, different modules.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#116

Post by nine_k »

rednum wrote: post #83
mumblemumble wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't run into problems with recruiting in general being too difficult. Plenty of people are interested in FP and are eager to do it professionally. But recruiting the right mix of people can be a challenge. Scala tends to attract people with an experimental temperament, and scare away more conservative developers. A team needs a healthy mix of both, though. It's the creative tension among different attitudes abou…

Yeah, good luck when someone with experimental temperament decides to implement some of your crucial functionality with semialgebras. (that's what happened in my previous job where we run Scala). I'm happy I didn't have to debug any customer issues around that module. Also, I didn't enjoy constant bickering with my reviewers what makes a beautiful code or not. Apparently there are five ways to do everything in Scala…

Were semialgebras a right abstraction, or over-engineering?

What is helpful in situations like this is the motto "as simple as possible, but not simpler". During a code review, if you see something you think is too complex, ask the author: "How could it be made even simpler? If not, how exactly a simpler approach did not work?" It sometimes helps find an overlooked simplification.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#117

Post by PopsiclePete »

weatherlight wrote: post #89
dwhitney wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think mixing the OO and FP is the crux of the problem. Type inference and subtyping (class based inheritance) don't mix well, and often require type annotations to help the compiler when types get somewhat complex. Eventually you develop an instinct for it, and it's not a problem, but the road to developing that instinct is littered with torn out hair. (edit: spelling)

I have found that languages that support both FP and OO paradigms its best to do things like data manipulation in FP, and use OO to encapsulate those processes and be limited to just passing messages to other objects. Avoid inheritance. Once an object is instantiated, don't change its internal state. etc.

>Avoid inheritance. Once an object is instantiated, don't change its internal state. etc.

Just embrace Clojure then. You get all that enforced for you, plus the entire Java eco-system.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#118

Post by taeric »

kaba0 wrote: post #82
taeric wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, what is the lisp like quality? I like scala. I haven't used it for anything big, though. And hard to argue that it has an interesting approach to discipline. Lisp, though, I like to use. I'm not as impressed with myself for getting something working in it. I am impressed that all of my books have code still work.

I think the more expressive language is that quality. Which I believe is the base of the problem. If you have a really professional team then it will make programming even complex programs a breeze. But this same thing is a catastrophe in the hand of average devs. Go’s design was pretty much this (though I prefer a more expressive lang than that). Java while not necessarily an elegant language, I think strikes a grea…

Some of this comes from a willingness to do it, though. With static imports, it isn't actually impossible to effectively add keyword like things to java. It is done far less often than it is in other communities, though. And I can't see why.

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#119

Post by jjtheblunt »

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #100
anthonyskipper wrote: post #20

I had a startup that went all in on scala. By the time we realized we chose the wrong language it was too late. Complexity is the primary issue with the scala language... when the whole goal is to have a scalable language which in itself is diametrically opposed to simplicity, your language is dead on arrival. After using Scala, Go seemed like a dream come true. We really loved the integration of OO and FP, really mi…

I think Scala needs to be treated something like how smart shops treat C++: there's so much there you can hang yourself with, so you need to define a subset/dialect and create a style guide and stick with it. This is how C++ has been successful at Google, and it's how I'd approach something like Scala if I were to go back to doing it now.

Perfectly said(!).

Re: Scala projects are difficult to maintain

#120

Post by randmeerkat »

mumblemumble wrote: post #95
rednum wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, good luck when someone with experimental temperament decides to implement some of your crucial functionality with semialgebras. (that's what happened in my previous job where we run Scala). I'm happy I didn't have to debug any customer issues around that module. Also, I didn't enjoy constant bickering with my reviewers what makes a beautiful code or not. Apparently there are five ways to do everything in Scala…

Yes. That's pretty much how the Scala project I was working on ran itself aground. Everyone got so caught up in flexing at each other that solving actual business problems became a secondary priority.

This is why I think the community is way more important than the language. In Python people are like, hmm, this is a hack, but it works for now, in Scala it’s, what have you done you savage?!?
Post reply on HN