Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | millennium2's commentslogin

That article looks seriously outdated. I think everyone following that advice will get a bad first impression of the language.


I try to understand what you try to say and have several interpretations, but sadly none of them seem to make sense.

What do you mean with 'optional types' and what does that comment about Play have to do with Scala?

Care to explain?


[deleted]


1. I'm not sure I understand the complaint about arguments. From you example it looks to me like the problem is that Scala requires type declarations and supports default arguments. I don't understand how this is worse than the equivalent Java example. I also don't understand how the Ruby version is inherently better. The only difference seems to be static vs. dynamic typing.

2. I don't understand how Play 2 screwed over Scala developers. It seems like Play 2 is much better for Scala developers. Scala is now a first class supported language instead of just an add on module. I also don't understand how Play 1 was 'the' thing that was bringing web developers to Scala. It wasn't in any way a core part of the framework. It was just something you could optionally use. Scala is something you could optionally use in any Java web framework.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: