I am also a +1 on not breaking git blame. IDEs support language specific settings in same project.
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Gwen Shapira <g...@confluent.io> wrote: > +1 on not breaking git blame > > -1 on rewriting Kafka in Java > +1 on upping our Scala game (as Ismael pointed out) > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Jason Gustafson <ja...@confluent.io> > wrote: > > > Can the java code be indented without affecting the results of git blame? > > If not, then I'd vote to leave it as it is. > > > > (Also +1 on rewriting Kafka in Java) > > > > -Jason > > > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Aditya Auradkar < > > aaurad...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > Bump. Anyone else have an opinion? > > > > > > Neha/Jay - You've made your thoughts clear. Any thoughts on how/if we > > make > > > any changes? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Aditya > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Aditya Auradkar < > > aaurad...@linkedin.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm with Neha on this one. I don't have a strong preference on 2 vs 4 > > but > > > > I do think that consistency is more important. It makes writing code > a > > > bit > > > > easier especially since patches are increasingly likely to touch both > > > Java > > > > and Scala code and it's nice to not think about formatting certain > > files > > > > differently from others. > > > > > > > > Aditya > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Jay Kreps <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Ismael, > > > >> > > > >> Makes sense. I think there is a good chance that it is just our > > > ignorance > > > >> of scala tools. I really do like having compile time enforced > > formatting > > > >> and dependency checking as we have for java. But we really put no > > effort > > > >> into trying to improve the scala developer experience so it may be > an > > > >> unfair comparison. > > > >> > > > >> -Jay > > > >> > > > >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Ismael Juma <ism...@juma.me.uk> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 2:00 AM, Jay Kreps <j...@confluent.io> > > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > I do agree that working with a mixture of scala and java is a > pain > > > in > > > >> the > > > >> > > butt. What about considering the more extreme idea of just > moving > > > the > > > >> > > remaining server-side scala into java? I like Scala, but the > > tooling > > > >> and > > > >> > > compatibility story for java is better, and Java 8 addressed > some > > of > > > >> the > > > >> > > gaps. For a system like Kafka I do kind of think that what Scala > > > >> offers > > > >> > is > > > >> > > less useful, and the kind of boring Java tooling like IDE > support, > > > >> > > findbugs, checkstyle, simple exception stack traces, and a good > > > >> > > compatability story is more important. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > I can certainly see the case for avoiding the complexity of two > > > >> different > > > >> > languages (assuming that the benefits are not worth it). However, > I > > am > > > >> not > > > >> > sure about the "findbugs, checkstyle" point. Static checking is an > > > area > > > >> > that Scala does quite well (better than Java in many ways): > > > scalastyle, > > > >> > abide, scalariform, wartremover, scapegoat, etc. And Scala 2.11 > also > > > >> has a > > > >> > number of Xlint warnings. > > > >> > > > > >> > Best, > > > >> > Ismael > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Regards, Ashish
