premium-concern

So what you are saying is that we should let poor people pay more taxes instead?

Because that is what abolishing corporate profit tax comes down to. The only substantial tax most states have are consumer taxes, and we all know that these taxes disproportionately hurt people that are already poor.

I love how people try to downplay the things corporations do.

"Oh, it's not tax evasion, it's tax avoidance!"

And now "oh, it's not tax avoidance, it's tax-friendly jurisdictions".

Let's just agree to close the loopholes so that everyone pays their fair share.

Which would be a shit-ton of money with their current tax "avoidance" schemes.

Clojure doesn't even have types.

I think the languages aren't really comparable from a maturity and support pov. Clojure is mainly done by hobbyists and enthusiasts. There is a large gap in terms of tooling that can't be closed in a few years.

And if you scroll up, you'll see that this wasn't me.

I don't have issues with Haskell-inspired constructs, I have issues with Haskell-inspired behavior.

I have no idea what you are even trying to argue.

Why would they create cats while they still had hope to save scalaz from its community? No need to spin some crazy conspiracy.

> you apparently dislike the people involved

LOL WTF? That guy has single-handedly destroyed more than one community already. It's not like it's some unfortunate thing that accidentally happens. It has happened before, and will keep happening until he is shown the door for good.

The rest of the scalaz community are enabling him to keep doing his toxic shit. The faster scalaz goes the way of Lift, the better.

I judge people for using scalaz. If you think it is acceptable to keep enabling him, you are a bad human being.

This desperate rewriting of history is one if the reasons why large parts of the Scala community are happy to get rid of these nutjobs.

They need to move their lazy asses to Haskell and start fixing and implementing the tooling there instead of enjoying their free ride in Scala while constantly shitting on the language and its community.

I'll be so happy when scalaz has finally gone the way of Lift.

Scala is consistently #15 or #16 in various measurements. Just not in TIOBE as they decided to use the wrong search terms to look for, so TIOBE doesn't provide useful information in this case.

Yes there are plenty. The correct order of type declarations just ties in with the better syntax for generics and leads to an easier to read, more consistent language.

Scala seems to be vastly more expressive while simultaneously having only 20% of C#'s feature set.

The great about types in Scala is that complex solutions to complex problems can be contained and don't infect the rest of the codebase.

The average programmer can enjoy completely consistent names and signatures across different libraries, without having to know that the consistency comes from one method being applicable to various types, not manual labor repetitiously adding the same method to different types which can drift apart at any time without anyone noticing.

HKTs are not that expensive. Slow compile times are usually caused by people doing Prolog at the typelevel in Scala.

Maven Central says it's around 4.4MB (with some things still pending to be dropped before the release of the final version)[1].

[1] https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/org.scala-lang/scala-libr...

I would disagree with the comment on verbosity compared to Java 8/Haskell/Ocaml. Most of the things I do regularly in Scala would require a magnitude of more code. Ocaml doesn't even have higher-kinded types or implicits, so I don't think it can win much on that front (except of saving a line where Scala's curly brace might be). With Haskell it really depends. There are certainly ways to write much more succinct code, but what I see in practice is that it's not that much different from Scala. Haskell has it's own unsolved issues though: broken typeclasses, lacking module system, poor tooling, and a weekly-changing, terrible dependency management.

Plus, it would look very poorly in court if trolls would be caught doing this. So maybe instead of not letting them join, show them that they "joined", but don't show them any relevant information?

I kind of wonder how these points are true today vs. 10 years ago ...

* It also compiles to Scala.js (it's actually the independent best compile-to-JS language out there in terms of libraries, tooling and IDE support). Support for compiling directly to native is coming around nicely.

* Scala is quite far away from the kitchen sink, and many of the questionable parts have been deprecated and/or removed.

* I have never seen much DSLs while writing Scala. Sure, it's probably quite nice, but I have rarely seen endless DSLs in practice.

* The jar is around 4MB (2.12) and when writing idiomatic Scala (~ not Spring/Servlet) there shouldn't be any kind of reflection or classpath scanning happening.

Jesus Christ, don't be so salty.

> with far less of the "type system" enforced by the compiler and almost all of it in our heads

That's why reasonable people want to have good type systems: People who think that they can keep the type system in their head are exactly the people whose opinion should be ignored.

> doesn't natively support dependent types

Well, it does.

I think ML-family is fine. Scala is much closer to ML than what people sort into the Algol-family or C-family groups.

That's nonsense. I think it's great that outside contributions (like allowing the use of the Scala's CI infrastructure) are valued, but the actual commits show a clear picture.

There is no determination in failing to get anything done and doing NIH for a decade.

Scala.js was largely done by a single student on top of his other university duties.

I think it's mostly down to determination. Some things are hard, but need to be done.

Haskell people just seem to give up more easily - see all the half-working projects. Nobody finishes stuff, the next dev just starts his own new project, and abandons it later.

Scala.js handily beats JavaScript in terms of IDE support and tooling

Well, Scala.js went from not existing to rock solid in 3 years. The various Haskell-to-JS efforts existed much longer, but none have the support, completeness and maturity of Scala.js.

The main difference is that Scala.js people sat down and did all the painstaking work, while Haskell devs spent the time talking how intellectually superior the are and got nothing done.

Roughly none of those points are true (anymore).

The huge difference is that Scala.js is production-ready, the other ones mentioned aren't.

I understand that you are trying to play semantics here, but in this case it doesn't work.

You can't BUILD an implementation of Java, because "Java" is defined by "passes the Java conformance tests".

You can build "something", but it won't be Java, so don't call it Java. Even Google understood that.

Thanks! What the hell are you doing that you experience issues this often? :-)

Thanks!

SI-1503 should warn in 2.12, additional progress might happen in https://github.com/scala/scala/pull/5310.

Great, thanks!

Sorry, but no. None of them can passed the JCK, which is a requirement to certify a Java implementation.