121–130 of 148 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scala is an immensely popular jvm language (as far as jvm langaugesg go). That's why it would be a good candidate.
Scala and Groovy both have about 2% mind share on the JVM. I wouldn't call that "immense".
Mind share ... are there any great minds left in the Java ecosystem? Doesn't feel that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It still doesnt change the fact that Scala, as a programming language, tries to incorporate too many concepts while still trying to be typesafe. This makes the language complex, and not an ideal candidate.
> It still doesnt change the fact that Scala, as a programming language, tries to incorporate too many concepts while still trying to be typesafe. That's not a fact -- its not even a fact claim -- its a value judgement. "Too many", except as sloppy terminology for exceeding an objective criteria, is inherently a value-judgement qualifier.
But usually it's like:
"so which concept do you think is superfluous?"
"crickets"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because Scala has features that are tricky to get your head around if you're not familiar with functional programming, it doesn't mean it's complex to write software in. You can write Scala that's basically Java with less syntax if you want. I think that's what's so great about Scala, Python and other languages that mix OO and functional elements; you don't have to throw away Java and pick up Haskell, you can st…
It still doesnt change the fact that Scala, as a programming language, tries to incorporate too many concepts while still trying to be typesafe. This makes the language complex, and not an ideal candidate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scala is not complex in terms of the language design. Most of features [or complexity] come from the libraries.
Implicits? Compared to Java, Scala is not a simple language. I'd say Scala's complexity is on the order of Haskell + Java syntax with additional glue on top of that. Not to say this is bad, it just means you need greater discipline when writing software in Scala. A bit like C++ (yes, I went there! :-)).
Over the last few months I've been writing Scala full time, and have even written some (demo grade) Android apps in it. My opinion is: Android should not adopt Scala as one of its primary languages. I think a platform's primary language should be accessible. It is an unfortunate fact that the stuff that most people only know about programming using some object oriented imperative language. People find it harder to ho…
> If it isn't a popular widely known language (Java) it should at least resemble popular widely known languages (Swift). Give people a piece of Java or Swift code, and they can read it. Give people a piece of Scala code, and they usually cannot. You realize that Swift not only resembles Scala syntax closely, but also adopts many of the same concepts? Oh, right. Just the usual Scala bashing ... I think you have forgot…
If you think that superficial syntax comparison is a fair comparison of the two languages, then you haven't written idiomatic Scala code. It's true that Swift looks a lot like imperative Scala. But that means nothing as nobody writes or should want to write imperative Scala.
> Oh, right. Just the usual Scala bashing ... I think you have forgotten to mention C++.
Did you miss the part where I said I wrote mostly Scala for the last couple of months? Look at my post history, I love Scala.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's no substantiative argument in this comment. > Scala, as a programming language, tries to incorporate too many concepts Too many concepts? Says who? How many concepts is too many? You don't have to use them all, and you can pick them up fairly easily as you go along; that's exactly how I learned the language. > while still trying to be typesafe. Not sure why that's contentious. > This makes the language comple…
> Says who? Says at least me and the OP, and probably others... I haven't put a ton of time into learning Scala and only occasionally interact with it, but in that capacity I'd definitely say I find it a bit intimidating and someone hard to read. Certainly there are many ways to write Scala, and a Java-like style is doable, but idiomatic Scala, as far as I've seen, encourages terseness and the use of opaque punctuati…
You realize that Swift not only resembles Scala syntax closely, but also adopts many of the same concepts?
The problem is that Scala generates very big jar files, which is why the only couple of Scala Android applications I've ever seen are toy apps. There is no doubt that any more sizeable project will blow up Dalvik's various restrictions like is already happening with Scala apps without ProGuard. There's also the fact that Typesafe doesn't care about Android so even if your current app works on Android, a future versio…
Yes, it's the same problem why compiling Scala to JavaScript is impossible ... oh wait!
In both cases the standard library overhead is a few dozens of kB! The horror!
That's why nobody is using Scala.js or Scala-on-Android for anything serious ... oh wait!
That's already happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the various language surveys that have come up these past months (RedMonk, TIOBE, job boards, github popularity, etc...) put Scala in a distant #30-50 slot. Certainly not in the top 90% mainstream languages.
Number 14 on Redmonk. http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2014/06/13/language-rankings-6-14... "The next JVM language to learn" (Java-focused survey): Scala leads comfotably with 47%. http://zeroturnaround.com/rebellabs/interview-with-typesafe-... Apart from that, you are completely missing the context. People are not looking for a random language, but for a language which is compatible with Java and Android, allows gradual m…
For Android, there are already more projects written in Kotlin and Clojure on Android than on Scala, so not sure why you think Scala is the "top contender".
On top of that, Scala's upcoming adoption of Java 8 means that Scala on Android is effectively dead for several years, until the Android team decides to adopt Java 8 (since they're not even on Java 7, this might be a while).
Typesafe just doesn't care about Android, why would you take such a risk to pick a language that is so poorly supported?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the various language surveys that have come up these past months (RedMonk, TIOBE, job boards, github popularity, etc...) put Scala in a distant #30-50 slot. Certainly not in the top 90% mainstream languages.
Please, let's be rational about this. A new language takes time to gain widespread use. Or are you telling me that Go, Scala, all account for nothing? We the developer community are in a transition phase. The advancements will become mainstream but it will take time. Scala is picking up pace like anything. This has been visible to anyone following the Scala ecosystem. Not in just programmer circles, the bombardment o…
I used to have very high hopes for Scala to become the next Java but at this point, I've moved on and hoping that another language will get that spot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scala and Groovy both have about 2% mind share on the JVM. I wouldn't call that "immense".
Are you counting java in that percentage? What is the percentage of scala out of non-java jvm languages?