I am not trying to segregate developers into two distinc camps here - one less capable than other...
But some sort of division is quite simply inevitable because in order to write maintainable code it needs to follow certain ... style or more deeply, a certain design philosophy. The more similar the style of different developers is, the better it is to navigate and reason about the code. New recruits need to be "initiated" into this cabal by carefully guiding them (through code reviews and simply by-example) until they instinctively understand "how the things are done around here". It has nothing to do with a choice of language. It is a social thing just as much as coding... On 6 okt, 13:16, Ricky Clarkson <ricky.clark...@gmail.com> wrote: > I disagree that it is wise to separate the skilled from the unskilled. > Instead, everyone should be aiming to write the best code they can. > DSLs are not beyond the capabilities of anybody employable. > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Roland Tepp <luol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'm sorry, if I did not understand the sarcasm behind your words (if > > there was any), but I think that the mix of junior and experienced > > senior *scala* developers is actually quite ideal setup for using > > scala in a project. > > > The job of the senior developer is to develop a library/framework/dsl > > for the application and junior developer's is the role of using these > > frameworks/libraries to produce the end result. The so much touted > > assymmetriscity of the language is exactly a perfect fit for this type > > of setup -- It is (and arguably should be) somewhat difficult to > > design and implement good libraries and power (and right) to do that > > should be reserved for those who know what they are doing. On the > > other hand - in the presence of good libraries, writing good and > > maintainable code by relativelt unexperienced "junior" programmers > > should be fairly straightforward process. And by using the language, > > those junior programmers will gradually and gently be introduced to > > more powerful and complex concepts, until they too will be capable and > > proficient enough to be called "senior" developers and can be handed > > more responsibilities subsequently. > > > I would also repeat tat what has been repeated everywhere ad nauseam > > -- picking a technology of implementation should not go by personal > > preference of any of the business people or even techies. The choice > > should be balanced decision between needs of the business and values a > > particular technology can offer and problems it can solve and how > > rapidly any given technology solution will return the busioness value > > compared to the investment of the time, money and experience the > > business has invested in it. > > > In some sense the immediate winner in this battle seems to be Java, as > > just by the number of developers who already have heavily invested in > > Java and it's ecosystem (libraries, frameworks, platforms, etc.) can > > bring back the immediate results much faster if they don't need to > > spend time learning a new language or framework.... > > > But as it has been pointed out by some in this thread and elsewhere, > > the long term ROI of those who have invested in learning Scala, seems > > to (sometimes significantly) overweight the time spent on that > > investment and the gap seems to widen as the experience is > > accumulated. > > > This is not unlike aquiring any sufficiently non-trivial skill -- as > > you learn, overcoming the initial inertia is quite difficult (at least > > until you start understanding the basic concepts). > > > On 5 okt, 14:41, Liam Knox <liamjk...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That is very true. And now thanks to Odersky any team with a mixed level > >> of > >> Junior/Senior developers, even given a choice of language, should stay well > >> clear of Scala. Clearly half the team would die of immediate brain > >> hemorrhage. Well played Odersky, good job Old Boy. > > >> 2010/10/5 Cédric Beust ♔ <ced...@beust.com> > > >> > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Miroslav Pokorny < > >> > miroslav.poko...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> >>> If C++ programmers are so clever why are they still stuck using a such > >> >> POS when many times there are better alternatives ? > > >> > Most developers simply don't have the luxury of choosing the programming > >> > language they have to use. > > >> > -- > >> > Cédric > > >> > -- > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > >> > "The Java Posse" group. > >> > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<javaposse%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > >> > . > >> > For more options, visit this group at > >> >http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "The Java Posse" group. > > To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javapo...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
