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

Scala 3.0.0-M1

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 148 posts

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#51

Post by willtim »

sjrd wrote: post #43
willtim wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am skeptical about the novelty of Scala's "OOFP" as you put it. It looks essentially the same as the original anonymous classes or SAM types in Java. Function values are objects with a single method and methods themselves are not first-class, but are wrapped in objects as required. The most important part of OO are the first-class modules; and in the literature, arguably more elegant examples of unifying first-clas…

Your comment makes sense if we think of FP as being about "function values". In a world where all sorts of programming languages have function values, this is not a strong enough characterization anymore (if it ever truly was). Functional programming is about programming with immutability first . So OOFP is about immutable objects. I go even further to say it is about objects with immutable interfaces , but the imple…

> Functional programming is about programming with immutability first.

I completely agree with this. So perhaps I am being rather hard on Scala.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#52

Post by tasuki »

blackoil wrote: post #18

In my company (10k+ devs) Scala seems to be losing steam. All the enthusiasts have moved to Go/Rust, while the pragmatics are staying in (moving back) in Java. No new major project is being built in Scala. Does anyone share this experience?

Enthusiasts moving to Rust (and Haskell), sure. But Go? That's definitely a language for the pragmatics, right alongside Java.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#53

Post by AheadOfTime295 »

rethab wrote: post #2

Scala 3 is a huge change. As someone who used Scala for years, but always wondered whether they can retain their users with competition from Kotlin, I'm extremely curious what this will mean for Scala in the long run. I'm skeptical, because the cost to migrate is big. But I'm hopeful, because Scala is a language I like to write code in. Edit: why am I skeptical? I know scala 3 is largely meant to be backwards compati…

Scala 3 supports braceless syntax, aka significant indentation, aka "YAML is to JSON as Scala 3 is to Scala 2"

https://dotty.epfl.ch/docs/reference/other-new-features/inde...

There was quite some debate on this, going on strong.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#54

Post by Thalarg »

smabie wrote: post #4

I've always loved Scala and Scala 3 is shaping up to be extremely exciting. Love the new ADTs and braceless syntax: really gives the language a cleaner and more ML inspired feel. No other conventional language (including OCaml, F#, etc) seem to have the effortless kind of power Scala does. The combination of the extremely powerful type system with the "OOFP" paradigm is a great combination. OOFP is such a great parad…

> considering the absurd productivity compared to Java/Kotlin/Python/blublang

I have not see more unproductive language than Scala.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#55

Post by hocuspocus »

newhkusers1 wrote: post #20
smabie wrote: post #4

I've always loved Scala and Scala 3 is shaping up to be extremely exciting. Love the new ADTs and braceless syntax: really gives the language a cleaner and more ML inspired feel. No other conventional language (including OCaml, F#, etc) seem to have the effortless kind of power Scala does. The combination of the extremely powerful type system with the "OOFP" paradigm is a great combination. OOFP is such a great parad…

Scala deserves all the hate. It might be a fun language for a throwaway pet project but I'd never recommend it in an enterprise setting. It's an extremely unproductive language because it's too flexible. There are so many different ways to do the same thing which introduces unnecessary complexity.

Yet plenty of big companies manage to ship software written in Scala just fine.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#56

Post by imtringued »

pjmlp wrote: post #35
dtech wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kotlin has significant support from the largest Java ecosystem: Spring. In my experience it's also much more compatible with Java/JVM libraries. In Scala that's perfectly possible but leads to very un-idiomatic code, in Kotlin you barely notice.

Spring supports everything that helps their bottom line. Where are the Groovy, Scala, Clojure support nowadays?

Groovy is still alive within the context of Grails (which is basically a very nice wrapper around Spring) and Micronaut (which is a direct competitor to Spring). Micronaut officially supports Java and Kotlin as well.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#58

Post by vvillena »

misja111 wrote: post #42
valenterry wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that a bad thing? It's the same in other languages and it is nice to have some flexibility. E.g. lisp: use whichever type of parentheses you want Or Kotlin: use short syntax lambdas fruits.filter(it == apple) or long syntax fruits.filter(fruit -> fruit == apple) or with annotated types: fruits.filter{fruit: Fruit -> fruit == apple} Sometimes brevity is good for the reader, sometimes more details are good for t…

The flexibility is perfectly fine when you're programming something on your own. But when you're in a team, or worse, in a large company, it starts to be a problem that everyone can use their own style. It's much easier to read someone else's code when you have a common code style. And in Scala there are not only many different ways to use the standard libraries or to structure your code, there is a pure FP vs OOP-st…

The Scala ecosystem has tooling to enforce code style across teams.

Your second argument is true, Scala is a big language, and there are three main paradigms: better Java, OOP+FP, and pure FP. It's similar to how C++ is used, for some people is just like C with some improvements, but there are people using lots of C++ features.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#59

Post by zaphirplane »

hamandcheese wrote: post #33
blackoil wrote: post #18

In my company (10k+ devs) Scala seems to be losing steam. All the enthusiasts have moved to Go/Rust, while the pragmatics are staying in (moving back) in Java. No new major project is being built in Scala. Does anyone share this experience?

Medium company (low hundreds of devs). My team is starting some new projects in Scala, which will be the first Scala at the company. So far it’s going okay. But I personally am surprised at how disinterested most folks are in learning anything new.

Why did your team choose Scala , assuming you are bound to the jvm what sold Scala over kotlin or Java.

Re: Scala 3.0.0-M1

#60

Post by vvillena »

trumpeta wrote: post #22
TeeWEE wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me scala's feature set is absurdly big and there are always 10 ways todo things. Look at the spec of Scala. Its 200 pages long. That's insane. I'd rather use Kotlin.

IIRC one of Odersky's stated goal for Scala 3 was to address exactly this issue. That being said, it is developed in a research setting so I guess even if they restrict these features now, there will be new ones added over time...

Scala has always been an opinionated language. The main difference is that this time is holding opinions against itself. Previously, opinions were held against Java, that's why there are features such as case classes, traits, and immutability by default. They answer to Java problems.

Scala is now mature enough that some issues have emerged. Typeclasses are cool, but programming typeclasses in Scala is a bit clunky. The type system is very powerful, but it could be even more powerful and that would actually help people write simpler code. And there are a bunch of unused features that could be removed. This is what Scala 3 is about.

Post reply on HN