61–70 of 71 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maven is a hug step backwards. SBT has its issues, but maven is god awful. Going forward though on new project, I plan on using Gradle. I find it a lot easier to work with than SBT.
At least you can find documentation on Maven :/ The biggest problem with operator-heavy syntax? Google searches.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least you can find documentation on Maven :/ The biggest problem with operator-heavy syntax? Google searches.
What operator syntax?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but I just don't see it for Kotlin From what I understand, Kotlin will be gaining more features slowly but steadily, similar to what you describe for Swift. I think that Kotlin's ability to integrate seamlessly into any Java codebase (at least in theory) is one of the strongest things it has going for it. Plus being backed up by Jetbrains, with very strong focus on providing a top notch IDE experience.
How would you distinguish Kotlin's and Scala's Java integration? I only use Scala, but don't use it within a larger Java codebase, but my understanding is that this is pretty straightforward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would you distinguish Kotlin's and Scala's Java integration? I only use Scala, but don't use it within a larger Java codebase, but my understanding is that this is pretty straightforward.
You should be able to drop in a Kotlin file into any Java project, and mix and match as you choose, without having to restructure the entire project, and move to a different build system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should be able to drop in a Kotlin file into any Java project, and mix and match as you choose, without having to restructure the entire project, and move to a different build system.
You still need to build it with a Kotlin compiler though, right? Assuming you install the Scala compiler directly, rather than relying on SBT, you can do the same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What operator syntax?
e.g. :+= and :++= (which are both commonly used in build.sbt files). If you don't know the difference between those it's rather hard to search for.
(Look, I'm not on a crusade against Typesafe/Lightbend, but they've been hugely disingenous on a lot of things like this. I could have accepted it if they'd just said "yes, it's operator overloading, but better". Instead they chose this ridiculous disingenuous "nono, it's just method names!" approach. In my book, the only people who can get away get arbitrary method/function naming are the LISP/Scheme people. Because in LISP/Scheme there is no precedence to worry about.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What operator syntax?
e.g. :+= and :++= (which are both commonly used in build.sbt files). If you don't know the difference between those it's rather hard to search for.
Most of the time, there is := (set something), += (add something) and ++= (add multiple things). I think that's pretty straight-forward.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
e.g. :+= and :++= (which are both commonly used in build.sbt files). If you don't know the difference between those it's rather hard to search for.
I have never seen them. Do they actually exist? Most of the time, there is := (set something), += (add something) and ++= (add multiple things). I think that's pretty straight-forward.
I know exactly what they do; the underlying reasoning is very consistent, maybe even elegant. But if you don't know and need to understand/modify a build.sbt file, it's very tricky to find out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have never seen them. Do they actually exist? Most of the time, there is := (set something), += (add something) and ++= (add multiple things). I think that's pretty straight-forward.
Yes, they're very common in build.sbt files. How else would you add library dependencies? I know exactly what they do; the underlying reasoning is very consistent, maybe even elegant. But if you don't know and need to understand/modify a build.sbt file, it's very tricky to find out.
Like this?
libraryDependencies ++= Seq(...)Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, they're very common in build.sbt files. How else would you add library dependencies? I know exactly what they do; the underlying reasoning is very consistent, maybe even elegant. But if you don't know and need to understand/modify a build.sbt file, it's very tricky to find out.
> How else would you add library dependencies? Like this? libraryDependencies ++= Seq(...)
libraryDependencies :++= Seq(...)