11:34 p.m.
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" <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
To: "Rules Dev List" <rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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 <tirelli(a)post.com> 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 <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
>
> 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
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> 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
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
Michael D Neale
home: www.michaelneale.net
blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
11:55 p.m.
New subject: Scala
Yes but then another format comes along ;)
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Michael Rhoden
<mrhoden(a)franklinamerican.com> 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" <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
To: "Rules Dev List" <rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
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 <tirelli(a)post.com> 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 <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
>>
>> 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
>> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> 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
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
--
Michael D Neale
home: www.michaelneale.net
blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
Michael D Neale
home: www.michaelneale.net
blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
3:40 a.m.
New subject: Scala
I like the idea of using Scala. And I am also looking forward to the
fit-for-rules replacement! :)
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Michael Neale <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>wrote:
Yes but then another format comes along ;)
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Michael Rhoden
<mrhoden(a)franklinamerican.com> 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" <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
> To: "Rules Dev List" <rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> 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 <tirelli(a)post.com> 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 <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
>>>
>>> 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
>>> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>>> 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
>> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Michael D Neale
> home: www.michaelneale.net
> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
>
>
--
Michael D Neale
home: www.michaelneale.net
blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
4:20 a.m.
New subject: Scala
well am just easing into it - don't want to shock anyone too much
(like Michael Rhoden said - could add a barrier to people
understanding the code).
but an isolated module, I am ok with (and I am trying to do more
things in isolated modules - have had enough with big coupled projects
!). Remember that scala just spits out a jar, with regular interfaces
to consume - so unless you need to mess in that dependency, you will
never see it.
Anyway, just thought people would be interested.
I have been doing things with spreadsheets. Scala allows me to do things like:
val cells = column.takeWhile(_.getContents != "WHEN")
Which allows me to slurp up the cells in a column until the first
value "WHEN" is found. That isn't that profound, but using that as a
basis allows you to do a lot of stuff very quickly without nested
loops and if statements (which on their own are simple, but adds up to
a mess when I just want to be declarative). Having written this code
before in java its much much harder work in java (and always making
silly off-by-one mistakes).
The main disappointing thing is the sorry state of the eclipse plugin
for scala - JDT sets such a high standard that we have come to take
for granted.
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Michal Bali <michalbali(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I like the idea of using Scala.
And I am also looking forward to the fit-for-rules replacement! :)
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Michael Neale <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Yes but then another format comes along ;)
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Michael Rhoden
> <mrhoden(a)franklinamerican.com> 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" <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
> > To: "Rules Dev List" <rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
> > 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 <tirelli(a)post.com> 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 <michael.neale(a)gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> >>> 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
> >> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael D Neale
> > home: www.michaelneale.net
> > blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-dev mailing list
> > rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rules-dev mailing list
> > rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Michael D Neale
> home: www.michaelneale.net
> blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
> _______________________________________________
> rules-dev mailing list
> rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev
--
Michael D Neale
home: www.michaelneale.net
blog: michaelneale.blogspot.com
5837
days inactive
5837
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Michael Neale -
Michael Rhoden -
Michal Bali