1:12 a.m.
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
3:02 a.m.
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
1:41 a.m.
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
5835
days inactive
5836
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Edson Tirelli -
Michael Neale