Personally I think that Python is great for small simple things, but
as soon as you start to scale the lack of statically checked
guarantees starts to bite you. The larger and larger you get the more
often and more subtle the bites get. Conversely, with a rigorous
statically checked language, you can start to use the static checking
in your favor. And, the more you understand the nuances of the type
system the more and more you can form it to give you even stronger and
stronger guarantees.
Anecdotally, Haskell (which is perhaps one of the most advanced
functional programming languages on the planet, particularly in the
type system department) has regular reports in the mailing list from
newbies that usually go from "wtf" to "whenever I get the compiler to
accept my program, it usually just works" in a fairly short time.
The syntax of Scala is an interesting and convoluted beast straddling
an unusual line between more typical functional programming languages
(Haskell, O'Caml, etc) and Java, and overall I think it ends up doing
a fairly good job, though it does have its confusing parts.
The ability to define operators in particular is a very tricky
subject. I find, along with implicits, that I treat it as a power tool
that should only be used in cases where it really makes quite alot of
sense (used extremely frequently, coming from math concepts, etc).
Luckily, it is fairly easy to find out where operators are coming from
-- if it looks like an operator, then check to see if it has a :
(colon), if it does, the thing on the right is where the operator is
defined, so look in its doc. Otherwise, it's the thing on the left
that has the operator, so look there.
If neither place has the operator, then unfortunately you've just
strayed into implicit conversion territory, which is unfortunately
tricky to track down in many cases. Sometimes in that situation the
scala REPL will help, because it prints out the types of expressions.
Coming from a background of knowing Java and Haskell (along with
Python and many other languages, not apropos to this discussion) I
found the syntax of Scala to initially be inscrutable but I warmed to
it after a month or two and now I think it's pretty good.
Regarding () and {} BTW, you can replace a single-argument argument
list with {}, e.g.
def myFunction(a: String): Unit = println(a)
myFunction("foobar")
myFunction { "foobar" }
The two calls are equivalent. It makes more sense with the latter
format with multiple argument lists or DSL-like things. I could write
up an example if you're interested, but it might be somewhat involved
if you're not familiar with Scala or Lift.
Overall, my suggestion would be to stick with it and ask questions. I
think it's worth it, and the people here are really helpful.
-Ross
On Oct 22, 2009, at 5:39 PM, jlist9 wrote:
>
> Just want to add to this. web.py is a Python web development framework
> that I like a lot, for its simplicity. In about 10 lines of code you
> can have
> a complete, albeit simple, web application. No XML whatsoever.
>
> http://webpy.org/
>
> Hope no one is offended by my mentioning a Python web framework on
> Lift list. Just want to say that things can be short and simple as
> well
> as easy to understand and easy to use.
>
> Of course the dynamic languages have their known issues, which is
> what drives me to Scala and Lift.
>
>> And too few operators leads to a whole lot of words, which leads to
>> a whole
>> lot of typing, or a whole lot of ctrl-space completions. It's a
>> toss up.
>> The wordy way is definitely noob friendly, while the operator way
>> is more
>> expert friendly.
>> Which do you design a language for? Let me know when that particular
>> religious war dies down please.
>> As someone who slings code for a living.... the less I type the
>> happier I
>> am..... YMMV
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
