DPM

@aliteralmind there are only a couple of openly hostile comments out of eight, I've seen much worse. Reddit is generally quite cool, some other sites on the other hand... (looking at you HN)

I agree

I wonder if in the future big companies that traditionally use Java (in which is easy for average programmers to put blocks together) could gravitate towards scala constrained by strict coding conventions just to get more succint java-y code (avoiding too much functional complexity). I guess Groovy would server that same purpose too.

I see, I really don't know much about the job market for each, other than ruby is more prevalent in start ups

I see... for some reason Scala hasn't taken off yet

ruby seems a multiparadigm well designed language with lots of jobs out there

I'm also tempted by ruby and groovy

I also thought with scala I could get a java job and say "hey I can program this in scala and call this java libraries, it's interoperable" and work my way in myself

my original intention was to eventually a get a job in something other than Java, it feels a bit "clunky"

thanks for your opinion, I also think he wasn't completely explicit in the implications

no need to go all functional either

but you can use Scala as a concise Java of sorts

but I think there aren't many Haskell jobs around

haha I dabbled a bit in Haskell some time ago, I like it

he was referring to closures in particular

otherwise you get a complexity explosion as you keep adding things to a language

I was feeling a bit skeptical about java 8, I read Josh Bloch saying that they should have been built from the beginning

instead of trying to get it right from the beginning (because they would have probably missed things anyway)

I think it was done with the purpose of making extensions to the language feel like native to it

yes, I'm not sure, it might not be an issue

I mean not "changing" the compiler, replacing it

I'm not sure about this, but that might mean changing the compiler (if that could be a way forward) wouldn't be so easy

for instance operators like "+" are methods in disguise

also Scala depends heavily on libraries, rather than having features built-in in the language

it seems the compiler is so over-engineered / code is so messy that it's extremely difficult to modify now

thanks for taking the time

I wonder if rebuilding the compiler would be a feasible way out

but the issue is not with the language itself

The bottom line seems to be that the compiler is a kludge

I think one could infer from the talk that the problems plaguing scala seems to put the language in a dead end, I want some second opinions to see if someone already watched the talk and if my conclussion is correct and those points are valid

more like the latter, but not exactly that

Yes I agree. However I'm a Java dev now, so I think learning scala wouldn't add to my JVM knowledge

thank you

No problem, I'll check a bit later if someone wants to share their thoughts then.

thank you, I thought so

Hi, do you think asking for opinions regarding this recent talk (youtube.com/watch?v=TS1lpKBMkgg -- We're Doing It All Wrong by Paul Phillips) in programmers SE would be a valid question? I started learning scala recently and then I stumbled on this video and I am hesitating to continue my learning. It seems Scala could be in a dead-end. I would like to see what's the consensus here.

I have to leave now, thanks all for your input

I do enjoy lisp, my issue is more with clojure really, so just wanted to pick up your brains and see if it's really my lack of skill / experience

Ah yes, I had read that one

my understanding is that functional code is intrinsecally harder to read than imperative...

Aside from writing new code, I wonder if maintaining a system written in a functional language is really hellish

it doesn't come so naturally

yes, functional style is more declarative

@MichaelT thank you :)

@Yannis why do you avoid lisps?

oops English is not my mother tongue, sorry

I used to like common lisp, I did things in a more primitive way, but I struggle with clojure

I watched the "simple vs easy" talk by Rich Hickey and I have the suspicion that it's a bit of a phallacy, I wonder if not having more constraints makes things harder, but again, maybe it's just my problem

rather than whether is the best prime finding algorithm

thanks, although I chose it as an example