Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Should I Move From Java To Scala?
"Scala is one of the JVM languages that manages to maintain a hip and professional vibe at the same time," writes long-time Slashdot reader Qbertino -- building up to a big question:
One reason for this probably being that Scala was built by people who knew what they were doing. It has been around for a few years now in a mature form and I got curious about it a few years back. My question to the Slashdot community: Is getting into Scala worthwhile from a practical/industry standpoint or is it better to just stick with Java? Have you done larger, continuous multi-year, multi-man and mission-critical applications in Scala and what are your experiences?
The original submission asks two related questions. First, "Do you have to be a CS/math genius to make sense of Scala and use it correctly?" But more importantly, "Is Scala there to stay wherever it is deployed and used in real-world scenarios, or are there pitfalls and cracks showing up that would deter you from using Scala once again?" So share your experiences and answers in the comments. Would you recommend moving from Java to Scala?
The original submission asks two related questions. First, "Do you have to be a CS/math genius to make sense of Scala and use it correctly?" But more importantly, "Is Scala there to stay wherever it is deployed and used in real-world scenarios, or are there pitfalls and cracks showing up that would deter you from using Scala once again?" So share your experiences and answers in the comments. Would you recommend moving from Java to Scala?
https://www.quora.com/Is-Twitter-getting-rid-of-Scala
Quote "I can't answer that, but I did attend lately a session by Raffi Krikorian, who was VP Platform Engineering at Twitter and one of the people responsible for introducing scala at Twitter.
He was asked about scala, and said that if he would have to choose again today, he's not sure he would go with scala.
The argument was that scala introduces a big learning curve for new developers. Because of its complicated language features it can become hard to read. So at Twitter they are trying to not overuse the complexities of the language, so the main benefit they get from it are lambdas. Which is now basically available with Java 8. So the overhead of developer training might not be worth the benefit."
Then figure out for yourself if you like it or not. If you're going at this from a PHB perspective just stick with Java.
Some people have real lives that don't revolve around work. There is nothing wrong with just working for money. If you want to care about something, contribute to Open Source. That is something which benefits us all.
You should switch to Rust. No wait, Swift, er no, Ruby, er no. Don't worry about the flavor of the year language.
At this point in time, you might want to look at Kotlin. It offers a syntax improvement over Java, good tool support, compatibility with Java and a simpler transition coming from Java.
I don't have a strong opinion about Scala, but the answer to questions in the form of "should I Move from Java to _____?" is almost always "yes" (for values of _____ not including PHP, VB*, or other asininities).
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
If you want to care about something, contribute to Open Source.
Don't make me laugh. Contributors to "open source" don't care about anything except money. They contribute low quality shit to get noticed, and they pad their resumes with projects they contributed jack-shit to, so they can scam companies into thinking they're fucking rockstar coder gods and get paid rockstar money.
That is something which benefits us all.
If you care enough to do something which benefits us all, you write Free Software anonymously, and you don't tell anyone you did it, because the individual doesn't matter as long as the software gets written.
I don't know where Scala is, but Java sounds like a nice place to live.
For a specific project - look at the ecosystem of libraries and tools, and what you want to accomplish. One project might be easier in java, another in scala.
For a career - look at jobs in your area. Are more people hiring for java or scala? You can learn both of course. Rust is also worth looking into.
But scala is just a language. You don't need to be "math genius" to use one language over another.
Yes, exactly. I'm not sure how you would 'move to scala', unless you are refusing to take a job where you would have to code in java. If you own your own company and make all the decisions then great, otherwise you will have to learn more languages, sometimes whether you want to or not (learn to want to :)
If you have time and interest work in Scala in your own time, learning a new language is always good, even if there is no direct monetary pay off
I have a PhD in CS and have coded in many many languages.
Difficult: Yes, I find that is the most difficult language I've ever coded in, but I really enjoy it. The difficulty mainly has to do with the type system, the compiler, and what I call Shiny thing syndrome (STS). When first learning I found occasional surprised in assignments because I had the same types on the left and right hand side, but did not. When examining the types, one would observe a page describing it. This can cause frustration for the novice. The compiler messages and the documentation have both improved immensely in recent years, so this is not as bad a problem as it once was, but still, the documentation is not a gentle guide for the initiate to understand the language. Finally, STS. There are some aspects of the language that seemed to have been simply shoe-horned in, often syntactically. That is, there are many multiple ways to do the exact same thing and all where shoved in because they exist that way and were a shiny thing in some other language. This hurts the language in my opinion.
Enjoyment. I find that when I am coding in Java or other languages I miss features of scala. I have grown to prefer scala over java, which I didn't initially think that I would. I find that I can write a lot of code for 30 minutes in Java or I can sit on my hands looking at the screen for 25 minutes and write for 5 minutes a beautiful piece of code that does the same thing with Scala. The code has an elegance and beauty to it. Actually I don't think I stair at the screen all that long anymore but switching to functional was initially quite the paradigm shift for this old fart.
Consequences ( Scala is not without its issues):
1) The difficulty of the language makes it very difficult to be productive with novice coders on your team. Don't do it.
2) Some aspects of the language: e.g. Macros, implicit parameters, implicit types, can make for elegant code, but can also make your code look like magic that will baffle your (less than stellar) team member. Use with caution.
3) You will think different after mastering it, that is a good thing. Nothing special about scala, you should learn new languages frequently for this reason.Scala will help you.
4) Don't do it because it is a hot new language, don't do it because you think it will solve a problem better than another or you'll make more money, do it because you love to code and you want to explore using a new tool set. Do it for the fun. I enjoy coding in Scala much more than java, and the akka actor framework is great. But you will find many analogues to the actor framework (example go routines, rust channels etc)*, but it all addresses the difficulties of multi-threading, which are somewhat cumbersome and error prone in Java.
*Yes I know they are different, before you pretentiously lecture me on the difference, please realize that I am comparing not contrasting here. They all have the same goal to approach simplifying life in the multi-threaded environment.
Anyhow, my advise is pursue learning scala with vigor and wild abandon. I'd also recommend go-lang and rust, they are cool also. After you learn them then decide on the tools that you want to work professionally in. You will not be harmed by the effort.
It exists because in Java, it's easy to work with a team of less-competent enterprise programmers on a multi-year project where new people are coming and going, without your codebase turning into an unworkable pile of garbage. That is the main advantage of Java. It is the COBOL of the modern age, and C# is its twin brother.
Of course, you can work with a project like that in C (for example), and I've seen it done, but you need to have strong leadership architecting the code and making sure things stay clean. Whereas in Java, you can get by with a mediocre architect and weak oversight and still come out alright (but the C project in that situation will be an unworkable mess. That goes for Python too, and Ruby apparently, if we can judge from Twitter's failure).
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Scala has achieved critical mass, it has shown steady growth over the years and will likely continue. It is entirely possible it will never become as big as Java but that should not be the requirement, it is plenty big enough you can count on it.
I have been developing large scale projects in Scala for the last 6 years and I can't imagine going back to Java now. Scala makes it easy and fun to write good correct code.
Scala is boilerplate free, it feels a bit like your favorite scripting languages yet with compile safety a powerful type system and lot's of help from IDE.
Obviously Scala supports Functional Programming which is essential as everything becomes multi threaded and/or distributed. Scala makes it easy to write functional code and is immutable by default, yet it isn't opinionated and you can use other paradigms when they make things easier/faster.
It's fun to write, you don't have to be a genius to use it, though with weak members on your team you will want a strict style guide. I found using Scala is a selling point when recruiting top talent, even those who never used it. Those who have used it, especially coming from a Java background are instantly hooked.
This was verified again in recent Stack Overflow developer surveys where Scala came out to be a very loved language, nearly everyone who tries it falls in love.
I highly recommend
My personal opinion:
If you're sick of Java's verbosity and various problems, think about Kotlin. Kotlin works really well, has fantastic IntelliJ support, runs on Android, and has fantastic Java interoperability. We already use it for commercial projects where I work.
Most importantly, though, it fixes the billion-dollar mistake: null. Nullable values are handled beautifully with no overhead.
It's very much like Swift to my understanding, but it's for the JVM.
https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/comparison-to-scala.html
If you want to schlep all the way from Indonesia to Italy, sure, why not.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
In my humble opinion..
Scala is great for scripting, iterating, researching, and playing around with various concepts. The downside is that its not binary compatible between major versions. There are some stability issues in production as well, some exciting rabbit holes of error stacks.
Java is like herpes. Its everywhere and is not likely to ever be gone completely. It is also rock-solid stable in production. The biggest cost is that you have to write it in Java. If only it was like scripting in Python, then this would be a great language. Incidentally Jython is not great for other reasons, but thats neither here nor there.
I don't have a particular opinion, other than the common concerns about its performance and resource utilization. But I tend to code at the traces anyway.
007: "Who are you?"
Pussy: "My name is Pussy Galore."
007: "I must be dreaming..."
First, background: I have been using Java at work, at least part time, since 2005. I started getting paid to write scala since 2012. I've definitely ran large, critical applications in Scala: I am running some right now.
Scala is a far more featureful, complicated language than Java is. A lot of what it gives you is really very high quality syntactic sugar (case classes, lambdas, pattern matching), but the one thing that sets it apart is its type system.
The trick is that nothing forces you to use Scala as if you were using Haskell instead: You can use it as a more sugary Java, using the extra type system fun sparingly. Restraint is the name of the game here, and also the reason some people have Scala horror stories: A company decides that Scala sounds great, and then hire some hotshot scalaz committer to teach everyone else how it's done. Then your codebase is full of operators that look like line noise, every class extends a base that comes straight from category theory, and half the developers say 'screw this, let's rewrite it all in Go!'
There is value in the category theory, and using arcane libraries like cats or shapeless, but 99% of the time, you don't need to: Just like back in the 90s you had to stop people from overusing OO design patterns, or their code will end up looking like Spring, Scala shops have to remind people to do the same when it comes to higher kinded types, hlists and concepts out of category theory. You really don't need any of that to use Scala successfully. Just ending up in a world where you typically don't need either a mocking library or any dependency injection nonsense is more than enough to switch. (Curse you Rod Johnson!)
The one thing where I would make people spend some time studying is in basics of functional programming, the very first of which is to learn to remove side effects from code, and clearly separate code that changes state from computation. Chances are you were doing some of that already in Java if you were hoping for a good unit test suite, but it's more important in Scala
Career wise, the more is a no brainer IMO: If you write Java, you are one in a very large pool of completely generic candidates that can use Spring and Hibernate to do something super boring. In Sala, you enter a smaller pool that most of the most average Java developers will never try to enter, so, on average, the job will be more interesting, and the pay will be higher.
Choose one.
Have gnu, will travel.
the language itself is terrible ... on varying levels of terrible, though.
When people write stuff like this, I really wonder about what they are talking. Or which languages they don't find terrible.
IMHO bottom line all languages except SmallTalk are terrible
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Having used plenty of Java in big-ish teams over the years - and mind you, having never used any other JVM languages beyond simple tutorials or scripts - I can imagine that Scala's learning curve might present a problem. Kotlin, on the other hand (as far as I can tell from my admittedly limited experience) adopts many of the best syntax features of alternatives like Scala and Groovy while keeping things simple enough for pretty much any existing Java developer to use right away. On top of that it does not introduce any new APIs or concepts like actors to get a grip on - as such cross-compatibility with existing Java code is 100% out of the box (this was of course a big factor for the JetBrains folks who are using it to develop the future of their IDE platform). And even though Java 8 is a huge advance in terms of functional programming support, it feels like a more natural fit in Kotlin. Essentially I think Kotlin is something like "Java 2.0", or what Java could be if they were willing to throw backwards compatibility out the window. :) At the same time it's dead simple to learn in its entirety in a short period of time, as opposed to Scala's huge feature set and learning curve. Scala may be the "better" language overall, but Kotlin seems like the more practical choice, especially for teams that have no Scala experience as of yet.
Why don't you mention the thinks you consider a flaw.
Except that I have to write in front of every attribute "private" and most methods "public" I'm not aware of any flaws.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
The bitter lesson I've learned over the years is that the larger the team, the simpler the tool set and the less clever the implementation must be.
And it makes sense. You pretty much have to target the 10th percentile programmer in your organization or your going to have your systems ruined over time.
In a small organization, you can probably hire selectively enough that your 10th percentile programmer can handle Scala. In a large organization (like Twitter is now), not so much.
I've got a long list but can't be arsed to find it. Off the top of my head:
-No out parameters for functions; you have to pass values you want to return or modify through the return value or through a struct ref in the parameter list.
-No unsigned integer types. (No, Integer.divideUnsigned() and the rest do not count.)
-Date/time libraries were complete garbage up until recently.
-No goto. (I can hear you getting ready to type "B-but Dijkstra said..." Fuck Dijkstra. There's a small but valid list of cases where goto is the right tool for the job (read the Wikipedia article if you are ignorant) but Java doesn't have it like every other civilized language does.)
Java is baby-proofed language because of the rather low quality of the programmers expected to use it.
They are in it just for the monies. It does make me seriously sad, and one of the main reasons I am quitting my job. But I kindof believe that a lot of workpaces are like that.
I think that's pretty close to the definition of work, something somebody else wants me to do for money. I think the number of people who are "living the dream" is <0.01% or less. And if I had a billion in the bank it would be a lot more "when I want it, how I want it, the days I feel like it". Like today I'd just like to be a beach bum. Or just soothe a hangover. Or sit inside and play WoW. I'm not complaining about work, as work goes it's very nice. But if money really was no subject at all... nah, I'd quit and do something else. Like, not "nothing" but nothing resembling any paid position. Also if anyone would like to give me a billion dollars to test that theory, I volunteer.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
You can't be serious. Java has many nice features. But Scala won't get you away from the JVM.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
With all the Scala hype, people neglect to point out that Scala is NOT compatible with Java; alot of libraries and tools have to be rewritten to work with Scala. This is why LinkedIn dumped Scala, Spring dumped its Scala adaptation and more and more companies are dumping Scala. And for all its hype on 'functional programming', you can do the EXACT same thing in Java and Groovy with 100% compatibility. In fact, every Java class converts 100% to Groovy; take any Java class and change the '.java' extension to '.groovy' and it will compile without issue. The same CANNOT BE SAID OF SCALA! This is because it is not compatible with Java and requires Java rewrites in order to be compatible.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
The big draw of java has to be the inter-changeability of programmers. Sure there are the rock stars, but for every rock star there are many people that corporations have come to see as being generic programmers in various tiers of accomplishment, that they can draw from a large pool and they know what they can generally expect from each level.
I think it makes sense to learn another language (programming or otherwise) though I think I'd look at one of the classics over scala, maybe even choose clojure
Nullius in verba
Since *when* has being "hip" been an attribute, much less a desirable one, of a competent language? The only friggin' professionals who speak in those terms are marketers.
Definitely no.
One of the interesting aspects of Scala is that you can transfer many of the skills acquired using OO languages like Python or Java.
You might find blog some posts and discussion in Scala where the discourse is very technical and presupposes a lot of knowledge of Typed Functional Programming but that doesn't mean that's the common way in which Scala programs are written.
It rather reflect the fact that people like to talk about interesting and novel approaches as opposed to the "boring" mundane things that comprises 90% of the experience of writing code in any language.
>> "is it better to just stick with Java?"
Hell no. I mean, you can learn another language and still do Java when / if needed. Scala provides a nice bridge between the more mainstream OO paradigm and the more principled FP way of writing software like Haskell.
I have a PhD in CS and have coded in many many languages.
In other words, "I have worked a lot in fake environments in many languages".
You got a PhD in part because of a language that is controversial, and you consider that a win? The value of a CS PhD just dropped a few points.
I too have coded in many different languages. Tcl/Tk was painful, but doable. Javascript was painful and not doable. Sed, awk, bash,various assembler, C,, C++, Java, Perl, Python is a subset of languages I've coded in.
Never used Scalia, probably never will. I'm old, odds are both against having the option, and me saying "not saying this is bullshit, but I'm pretty sure I saw it come out of the bull and hit the ground".
I guess you're just retarded then.
Wait, what? if lambdas are shit programming why did almost every language add them as a features in the last 5-10 years? including c++.
I think you have mostly missed my point, Scala has research oriented roots, and it you're not ok with that, fine. But if it makes you a more efficient programmer, it might just be worth the effort of picking up.
Also, this is what I mean by pattern matching:
http://docs.scala-lang.org/tut...
https://doc.rust-lang.org/book...
https://developer.apple.com/li...
Stretching your brain is a good thing, but the work environment cannot assume a ready supply of enlightened developers to maintain high brow code. Some learning is best on your own time.
Table-ized A.I.
You got a PhD in part because of a language that is controversial, and you consider that a win?
I'm sorry, in what part of his post did he say that?
There are a zillion fad languages out there. Each (presumably) excels at something, but most languages that are not in widespread general use will usually suck at anything outside the core competency of that language. Second-tier languages also have smaller communities developing tools and components, making them less desirable. Finally, if you ever need to hire programmers, you seriously limit your pool of available candidates if you lock yourself into a language that is not in widespread use.
My advice: stick with mainstream languages like Java, C#, C++, JavaScript. All of these languages are powerful in their own way, and there are lots of people who use them.
1) Do you need a degree or to dive into the math to make effective use of the language? No. Like any programming language you can just learn the patterns and apply them. That said, like any programming language, if you learn the math behind why it works you can make more effective use of the language. (You are probably using monoids, functors, monads, and maybe applicative functors in any large program. Not knowing what those are doesn't mean you aren't using them.)
2) Would I recommend switching?
I having been programming professionally for 31 years. I have been programming Scala since 2010. I have taught about a dozen people the language. Much like, "Should I quite my day job to put all my time into my startup?", the answer is probably, "not right now". If you can get the same or better pay, under the same or better conditions, then obviously yes, make the switch. Otherwise if the language interests you (same answer for the startup) then work on it in your spare time with your day job giving you the security you need to expand your horizons. As a programmer learning new languages will make you a better programmer. Learning languages like Scala or Haskell which lean so heavily into functional programming and their higher-kinded type systems will definitely expand your knowledge. Additionally you'll then be able to decide if a switch is worth it FOR YOU rather than relying on getting a useful answer from a infinite number of monkeys banging on an infinite number of keyboards.
All that said no company would pay the price I would demand to code in Java again.
I got stuck maintaining a bunch of Scala code at one point, and I'd say "no thanks." Why?
The code wasn't any more error-free than any other code, but it was an order of magnitude more difficult to maintain. It also didn't seem to speed up the development process any; the devs were just as late as they were without Scala.
Scala developers are also expensive and hard to find, two things that make finding a "Scala maintainer" a difficult task.
Unless you're willing to invest in supporting it, I'd say no. If you want a functional language go to a real one, not one built on top of Java. And be sure that the use case for it fits the language.
No question there's a learning curve, but you don't have to be a genius to learn Scala and use it effectively. Is Scala there to stay? Yes. I've used it successfully at TraceLink, Inc and CiBO Technologies, Inc and am a big fan. Scala is richer and more expressive than Java and eliminates annoyances like checked exceptions. The key is the principal of minimum power (use the smallest hammer that gets the job done) and some consistency in style across the team. If people go meta-nuts with advanced language features, the result can be spectacular failure. If you use the language right, it's wonderful and you can write some great code quickly.
Damn, I posted basically the same thing above. See here:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
I am surprised that java developers don't seem to know how to create output parameters. As stated in my first post above, I am not saying this is a good idea but here is how you do it if you need to:
int[] out1 = new int[1];
int[] out2 = new int[1];
int[] out3 = new int[1];
void setOutParameters(int[] v1,int[] v2, int[] v3) {
v1[0] = 1;
v2[0] = 2;
v3[0] = 3;
}
setOutParameters(out1,out2,out3);
System.out.println(out1[0] + "" + out2[0] + " " + out3[0]); // prints "1 2 3"
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
Still can't figure out why java exists... It is not just that the JVM is bloated but the language itself is terrible.
Java exists to bring higher level programming to the masses.
Before Java we wrote in C and C++ because these were the only languages fast enough for real world use. Using anything else (like Smalltalk, Lisp or Pascal) was considered just silly university theories.
Java is the language that popularized the concept of virtual machines, garbage collection, and interpreted languages for real world use.
Note that languages such as Python existed before Java, but they were ignored entirely by industry. Java made it possible for you to even talk about Scala, Ruby, Python, .
I don't mean to sound like a fanboy but as an "old timer" I feel the need to educate the young who seem to not know their history. Now get off my lawn.
The chains of code that bypass in nulls, aka Lamdas, monads etc. are just shit programming. Deal with the error where you made the error. Do it clearly and well commented. Making compact code isn't useful, the computer has plenty of space to hold your code.
You were born in the 90's weren't you?
"If you really care enough to do something which benefits us all, you anonymously create a foundation focused on creating Free Software, and leave your entire fortune to it in your will."
Yeah, but here is the Catch-22: You first need to program for the $$s to get that fortune in the first place
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
I agree. Most of the higher-levels language we use today are usable because the computers and implementation technology got fast enough make them practical. A lot of compiler tech, especially in run-time code optimisation and JIT and VM's, came out of years of experience with Java. Al the higher-order abstractions such as Lambdas, Continuations, Closures and such stuff was known in 1960s and 70s, but the implementation tech was just not up to it. In the end, programmer productivity is what counts, it is cheaper to throw silicon at the problem.
By modern standard the language is a bit archaic, but so in Pascal, and, for that matter, C. But Java was a very important milestone in the process that got us where we are now.
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
I guess you're just an average stupid fanboy then. Keep living in the land of ignorance ;)
S'not actually in the post but he nose.
It's projection. He feels he needs to exert dominance and show that he is better than people with doctorates which is kind of entirely pointless due to different people working on different things.
Perhaps because it's one of the world's most widely used development languages and if something works, it's hard to make a business case to rewrite it just because some snob on Slashdot has a hard-on for another language.
Popularity is the weapon of mediocre coders. And sorry, but most java libraries are so bad they need to be rewritten.
You're ignorant af. 1. Java isn't fast. It's ok, though. 2. Smalltalk and pascal is used in the industry. If it weren't for the expensive license of delphi and its one-platform policy, java wouldn't be here today. 3. Garbage collection was present DECADES before java - starting with lisp. Java does have a good gc for performance but at latency it sucks. 4. Java did NOT popularized interpreted languages since it is NOT and interpreted language. Java doesn't even have an interpreter. Scala has. 5. Python isn't ignored by the industry(sadly). 6. Sadly, Scala is on the JVM. But Scala is present on other platforms too: native(as scala-native) and node.js(as scala.js). Python and Ruby isn't - the first even predates Java. The second has NOTHING to do with it. 7. First, educate yourself before trying to educate others. You - javaists are just showing here how ignorant you're.
In other words, "I have worked a lot in fake environments in many languages".
Or, to rephrase what you said "I have my head permanently lodged up my arse".
You're welcome.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
No, that would be you if you don't even understand why Java exists.
No
He gave you some sense as to why he's experienced in this area. You can choose to believe it or not; you can listen to his opinion or not. Responding snottily, to things he didn't say, seems like a less than optimal choice. Put another way, I got a lot more interesting info from his post than from your retort.
First - there was an extremely obvious attempt at a joke (which you appear to have taken seriously and appear to require it to contain information) hence the "Responding snottily".
Second - how can you get any more snotty than putting down all doctorates as working in fake environments? I really do not see how that does anything other than reflect on the person who is trying to devalue the work of a vast number of others while blowing their own trumpet.
Stitch up your enemy? But seriously, programming is nothing like warfare. It is more like crafting a bespoke garment for a gorilla who believes himself to be a six legged, two headed flying dragon. And cleverer syntax and multiparadigm languages make it easier to confuse the gorilla.
No!
It can, actually. It alternatively compiles to JavaScript.
Should i dress white or black today? Should i wear a fancy shirt or a hoodie when going to work?
So no, unless you have a really compelling reason (like: the project i am currently doing sucks in java and would be very nice in scala), stay with what you know.
There were workstation operating systems written in Pascal. (Hell, there were ones written in Lisp, but those required specialized CPUs.) How is Pascal "not fast enough"?
Ezekiel 23:20
0. Understand that while OO is sometimes a good thing, not everything is (or belongs in) an object. Math.sin() my arse. It's a fucking function.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
you don't know what pattern matching is. the rest of your post doesn't make too much more sense, either.
I've programmed in more languages than I want to count. In the end it is all code and what matters is the market.
Code I like:
Machine code (ARM core is interesting)
Pascal
Python
But what I like isn't important - it is what will provide work.
A better question is to ask yourself what the return on investment is on learning a new language?
I thought a lot of the stuff I learned would make me more valuable than it did - most of it is obsolete now or pays very poorly.
The other thing to consider is with a lot of code work going overseas would it be better to look at stuff that can't leave?
This. Do a side project in it & see if you like it.
If you don't get more than a quarter of it finished, the answer is "no".
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
If you make it possible to attach methods to objects at the lowest levels, then you usually don't need to pass lambdas.
Take a GUI push button, why can't one simply define an OnClick method for a given button in Java? That shouldn't be asking to much. Simply blur the distinction between class and object, or make it a class-definer option. Java simply has a limited OOP model.
Can someone present a use-case in typical work coding where lambdas are a must, or at least a huge code savings?
Table-ized A.I.
Much as I'd like to take the opinion of a clearly godlike hacker as yourself, the fact still remains that no one is going to rewrite all that code in whatever language you think is the One True Way.
Of course, for your extremely limited interpretation of the words "Pascal" and "competitive", you're right! ;)
Ezekiel 23:20
Try Ceylon instead of Scala. It's significantly simpler and cleaner, it's modern, and it has perfect Java interoperability. It's actively developed by RedHat's enterprise Java team.
The C and C++ jobs are few and the applicants for those jobs are innumerable.
I've got a long list but can't be arsed to find it. Off the top of my head:
-No out parameters for functions; you have to pass values you want to return or modify through the return value or through a struct ref in the parameter list. -No unsigned integer types. (No, Integer.divideUnsigned() and the rest do not count.) -Date/time libraries were complete garbage up until recently. -No goto. (I can hear you getting ready to type "B-but Dijkstra said..." Fuck Dijkstra. There's a small but valid list of cases where goto is the right tool for the job (read the Wikipedia article if you are ignorant) but Java doesn't have it like every other civilized language does.)
Java is baby-proofed language because of the rather low quality of the programmers expected to use it.
All these amount to nothing more than dogmatic statements pretending to be axiomatic. I share some of these, but as pet-peeves, nothing more. Nothing in it impedes a competent worker from using it to create quality work (this also applies to Groovy, C#, C/C++, Python and several other languages I've worked with as well.)
I have a PhD in CS and have coded in many many languages.
In other words, "I have worked a lot in fake environments in many languages".
Your ego must be very fragile to be trigger like this.
You got a PhD in part because of a language that is controversial, and you consider that a win? The value of a CS PhD just dropped a few points.
That's not what he said, but obviously, it is your right to put words into his mouth. Keep banging that strawman, I don't judge.
What would you do with the large amount of business critical Java systems oh mighty one? You can't just turn them off because the users still need the functionality. I'm using my imagination but I can't picture how systems with the same functionality in a different language would just appear.