Yes but then another format comes along ;)
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Michael Rhoden <[email protected]> wrote: > While not just stay with Java? I don't understand the need to mix another > language into codebase, which has little support compared to java. If it's > just to make your efforts a little faster, I would argue you loose value in > the project by having yet another aspect to the learning curve for every > other developer. > > Betamax was better than VHS and laser disc was before it's time. Sometimes > it pays to follow the masses, when you expect them to use your product ;) > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Neale" <[email protected]> > To: "Rules Dev List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 6:41:42 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central > Subject: Re: [rules-dev] Scala > > Yeah netbeans is getting pretty decent scala support - improving all the > time. > > people are using the eclipse one, so it is slowly getting better, its > just that it is unstable that troubles me. > > yes, as Mark said, groovy is fine, but its quite a different language > in semantics if not syntax. Whereas scala is probably more a 1 for 1 > replacement (although it can have a stepper learning curve in some > areas) and a very fast powerful language (not that for this bit speed > is too sensitive). > > Whilst initially there may not be automated refactorings, as it is a > static language (you tend to never require reflection in it) it can > cope with manual refactorings much better then java (as you get > compile errors and warnings for any missed changes). > > Initially I am looking at it for a testing module that uses > spreadsheets, so will see how that goes (its fairly isolated). > > > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 1:02 PM, Edson Tirelli <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I like the functional aspect of scala and the way it promotes some >> modeling good practices. The main worry is really, once we start >> implementing things on it, to maintain that codebase, and for that tooling >> is paramount. So, if maven works well and IntelliJ can do some minimum >> work >> on refactories, I like the idea of an incremental inclusion of scala >> components where they make sense. >> >> []s >> Edson >> >> 2009/1/11 Michael Neale <[email protected]> >>> >>> Hey All. I have been looking into scala for sometime, and recently >>> started using it for a testing tool (kind of a replacement for the >>> "fit for rules" library). >>> I have been quite impressed with it, the tool integration (with >>> intelliJ) is outstanding, and it works nice with maven (even with >>> mixed java source). >>> >>> Assuming this goes well, I am thinking of extending the usage of scala >>> to the server side components of bits of guvnor (obviously the client >>> is still GWT). Probably in a small way at first (I have found that >>> common annoying bits of code in java can be much clearer in scala - >>> examples to come !). >>> >>> I was interested in what people think about this? Does it make it >>> harder for people to get into the code (I am not aiming to write the >>> densest scala, just use it when approriate)? >>> >>> The main downsides I see are: Eclipse support - the plugin for eclipse >>> for scala is not great at the moment (netbeans or intelliJ would be >>> better), and general familiarity for people to read (although I >>> personally think it would take anyone who reads this list minutes to >>> learn enough to follow the simple things I would do). >>> >>> Thoughts? Objections? >>> >>> FAQ: Why scala? well its closer to java in intent then all other >>> popular JVM languages (ie its static) and compiles down similarly to >>> result in similar performance (better in some cases). I use "closures" >>> a lot (thanks to GWT that got be in the habit) but the inner class way >>> of doing it in java gets combersome. >>> >>> -- >>> Michael D Neale >>> home: www.michaelneale.net >>> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rules-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev >> >> >> >> -- >> Edson Tirelli >> JBoss Drools Core Development >> JBoss, a division of Red Hat @ www.jboss.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> rules-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev >> >> > > > > -- > Michael D Neale > home: www.michaelneale.net > blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > > _______________________________________________ > rules-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev > > -- Michael D Neale home: www.michaelneale.net blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
